Saudi Arabia: What Makes a Saudi a Jihadist?

How do you define the word jihad? I’ll admit that the first thing I usually think of if I hear the word is a holy war.  That’s how I often see jihad referred to when used by western media.  Yet in Arabic, jihad, as a noun, translates to ‘struggle.’ A person who is involved in a jihad is referred to as a mujahid.  The plural of mujahid is mujahideen.  These are terms associated and used in reference to Al Qaida, Osama bin Laden and the Taliban.

In the case of Saudi national, Mansour Al-Nogaidan, he equates the term jihad to extremism.  In his article ‘Losing My Jihadism’ he acknowledges that at one time he was an extremist who clung to literal interpretations of the Quran and try to force them on others.  In other words, he acknowledged that “he was a jihadist.”

Al-Nogaidan found that when he was 16 years old, he had doubts about the existence of God.  Can you imagine such thoughts coming from a Muslim who was born in the country which hosts the two holy mosques of Islam?  His doubts of God and Islam led him to join a hardline Salafi group where he abandoned his life and family.  His actions took him beyond the worse of the muttawa (religious police) and even landed him in prison.

By the time he was 26 years of age, he states that he “saw the light,” made his own peace with God but then found that his own views of how Islam was practiced in Saudi Arabia changed dramatically.    By 1999 he, himself, was working as an imam at a Mosque in Riyadh.  He reached out wanting to expand his own views of the teachings of Islam and discovered some books which had a profound influence on him.  Al-Nogaidan’s views on how Islam was practiced in Saudi Arabia prompted him to write an article on the subject.  He was not greeted with open arms by expressing his views which were contradictory to the mainstream Saudi Islam.  Ultimately he had to leave the mosque where he was the Imam.

I believe it could be said that Al-Nogaidan is still a jihadist except that he now has a new cause – Islamic Reform.  Or perhaps it is the same jihad that has finally come full circle?

Although not answered in Al-Nogaidan’s article, what I would like to know is what made him, a Saudi Muslim, have doubts about the existence of God?  Was it because of how he saw Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia?  Was it because of the area from which he came – Buraidah – which has been known to have home-grown extremists (jihadis?) and is one of the most conservative towns in Nej’d?  How many more Saudis may be out there like Al-Nogaidan was, confused and uncertain? Easily influenced…and all we can do is pray they take the right path.

About these ads

274 Responses

  1. I looked up that “book” thinking the “For Dummies” publishing company has really gone off the deep end. There is no book. :P I am tired….off to bed.

    I will read this soon!!

  2. I think it’s normal for people to question God’s existence from time to time. Sure we see the beauty of creation and the order of the world, but still our minds struggle with believing in Something we cannot see or grasp or understand completely. Not to mention we are often made out to be crazy by some who think God is a figment of our imaginations and only science and/or man is god. I think wondering about God is healthy and good to some extent.

    I liked hearing about this man and I’m glad he decided to embrace a more tolerant version of Islam,

    AND

    I’m glad anthrogeek looked up that book before I went to searching for it myself. ;-)

  3. I love the poster of this dummy book! :-)

    Seriously –
    There are many well-researched books to explain how the definition of Jihad has changed in different ways in the 1400 years of Islamic history – Saudi Arabia contributing its extremist strain which actually produces the violent Jihadis.

    Only some of them are –

    Richard Bonney, Jihad: From Quran to Bin Laden, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2004.

    Andrew G. Bostom and Ibn Warraq, The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, Prometheus Books, 2008.

    Brad K. Berner, Jihad: Bin Laden in his own words : declarations, interviews and speeches, Peacock Books, 2007.

    Arthur Kemp, Jihad: Islam’s 1,300 Year War Against Western Civilisation, Lulu.com, 2008 (About what Europe needs to do to avoid being overrun by extremist Jihad)

    Steven Emerson, American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among Us, Simon and Schuster, 2003.

    Brynjar Lia, Architect of global jihad: the life of al-Qaida strategist Abu Musʻab al-Suri, Columbia University Press, 2008.

    Robert Spencer, Stealth jihad: how radical Islam is subverting America without guns or bombs, Regnery Publishing, 2008. (I know many people on this blog have problems with Spencer, but he has talked a lot of sense in this book.)

    The role of Saudi Arabia is critical in this because it exports its extremist ideology to other countries. This leads to the emergence of extremism in different countries under the guidance of Saudi ideology.

    I strongly feel the democrcies of the world should make a strict law that extremism can’t be taught in their lands under the pretext of freedom of religious practice.

    This should cover not only Islam but all religions, since democracies can’t distinguish between religions and all religions have the potential to turn extremist in some ways.

  4. I agree with Susanne430 that questioning God and the role he plays in one’s life is normal, especially in our youth – no matter the religion. It’s sometimes difficult to square up the way the world works and what we are taught about how we should treat our fellow man, of example. Hypocrisy runs rampant in all societies, and especially so among people who claim to be following the word of God, for some reason. I remember feeling very disheartened in my teens when I’d run into so-called “believers” who treated others badly. I couldn’t mesh the lives they really lived with what the piousness they espoused in public. I know that the same is true among Muslims, as well. People who become radical, in any religion, are easily manipulated by others. I’d say most don’t have a sense of themselves anyway, and so fervently swallow anything that will give them a sense of purpose and identity in life.

  5. Questions and even agnosticism seem a normal development for anyone who is raised with any kind of religion. What you are asking about is the psychological positioning of someone who adopts an attitude of extremism.

    Preoccupation with religion is a symptom of temporal lobe epilepsy. I don’t suggest that all extremists have temporal lobe epilepsy, nor that great work cannot grow out of the situation– Karen Armsrong has temporal lobe epilepsy.

    The connection does serve to suggest that human brains can be hard-wired for intense religious tendencies. A futuristic scenario could include a pill that would control the excesses of religious behavior.

    Interesting possibilities there, no?

  6. Interesting concept — excessive religious behavior. I like that. But who and how would one define excessive?

  7. That would all come clear once the physiological, pharmacological and sociological conclusions are all worked out. We probably won’t live to see it.

    AllahuAllam.

  8. I believe it is how one is taught islam.

    One of the biggest problems faced in Saudi Arabia is that some people preach islam as a number of acts rather than a state of mind and heart. grow a beard, shorten the thobe, pray five times a day and you’re good. otherwise you get the stick!

    It’s very easy to notice people like this, they are the people with long beards that shout, treat people badly or steal without regret. These are the people that marry and divorce as they please without a second thought because they learnt religion as a set of rules with no feelings and forgot the manners of the prophet PBUH that brought them the message.

    A TV show host put it very nicely:
    “we teach our children religion by making them memorize a saying of the prophet like the one that says (being clean is a sign of faith), they memorize the saying, they memorize who said it, who wrote it, when it was told, what each word means, etc… After the kids are done with the exam they crumple the paper and throw it on the floor!, what good was making them memorize the hadith if they dont practice it?”

    We have a problem with the education system.

  9. “A futuristic scenario could include a pill that would control the excesses of religious behavior”

    Good one, Marahm!

  10. @simple saudi – My husband and I joke and refer to this kind of practice as robotic Islam. People regurgitate what they hear or are taught but fail to follow themselves the messages of the information they are spewing at others (but somehow fail to see their own failures… oh, the irony). It suits what you are saying quite well and I couldn’t agree with you more. If Islam were implemented as it was intended rather than just preached, there would be so much more progress made in the true cause and purpose of Islam instead of the backwards steps that the few force upon the many through their misdeeds, misguidance, and actions, etc. This is not unique to the kingdom or to Islam either. I think religions across the board suffer from some form of this and the true spirit of the prophets’ guidance gets lost along the way. Sad how the messages of the bad apples are so much stronger than the voice of the rest.

  11. I see nothing wrong with questioning the existance of God, it is part of development as Susanne said. I also applaud the man in question for trying to be more moderate.

    I don’t know so much about Saudi but in the UK and Pakistan it is often the young men who are going through this development of ideas which are easily caught up in extremism. It is more prevalent among the less affluent, less educated or somehow dissaffected. There is something which is missing in their life. Perhaps some of them are young and idealistic and looking for a cause. For young Muslims they may feel they can change the world by becoming a Jihadist and writing the wrongs they see.

    In all cases it is the duty of the Muslim community to have zero tolerance towards hate preachers and hate literature. the elders of the community should make every effort to ensure the ideologies they preach are tolerant and peaceful. They should offer these same men another cause (humanitarian aid, charity, disaster relief) rather that violence to which they can attach themselves and do good, not spread evil.

    As for an excess of religion – I don’t believe there is a problem with that. I’d love to have an excess of love between me and God but it should be a mostly private matter and the result should make you a better person. I’d love to have the confidence that because I have an excess of religion God will comfort me and provide for my every need so I should have no fear or worry. Isn’t that the essence of religion? So, I want an excess but I don’t have to go shouting to everyone I meet about it!

  12. @Daisy,

    Are you seriously going to mention Robert Spencer? The man is a RAVING Islamophobe, just like Steven Emerson. Now I know where you get your ideas and beliefs from!

    Both of these men are filled with hate, nothing more, nothing less. Why not suggest reading David Duke to understand the Black Panthers or the NAACP?

    These men, and those like them, are extremists themselves. Take a look at what is Robert Spencer’s blog and the types of commenters he gets. He is just on the opposite end of the extremist pole from the jihadis.

    Spencer and those like him are not part of the solution, they are part of the problem!

  13. EVERY1 SHOULD BE PROUD JIHADI.

    ONLY THEN WE WILL GET PEACE IN ALL OVER WORLD. BUT BEFORE HE NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS JIHAD WITH CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF ISLAM

    Finding definition of Jiohad from Taliban or Al-Qaida or western media?? No way!!

    LETS SEE REAL MEANING OF JIHAD?
    ——————–

    Koran a Book of Peace, Not War, Scholars Say
    Peter Standring
    National Geographic Today
    September 25, 2001

    Osama bin Laden, who is widely assumed to be the force behind the September 11 hijackings in the United States, cites the Koran, Islam’s most holy book, as the inspiration for terrorist attacks. But Muslim scholars around the world who are reviled by such actions explain that the Koran preaches peace.

    “The Koran is saying to humans, this is the final guidance from your Creator, for the specific purpose of worshipping him and creating a civil society where you can live in peace with one another,” says Muslim scholar Imam Sulayman S. Nyang of Howard University in Washington, D.C.

    Muslims around the world rely on the Koran for guidance, says Nyang. Devout followers heed the call to prayer five times each day and recite passages from the holy book. Muslims believe that the Koran is God’s unfiltered message—teaching them how to lead a good life and become a better, more moral person.

    “The Koran is very specific with regard to the nature of human struggle, because in order for a human to be at peace with himself, they must control their baser instincts,” says Nyang.

    The quest to control base instincts such as greed, lust, and cruelty and to seek spiritual purity is known by Muslims as the “great jihad.” Featured widely in the Koran, the “great jihad” is a person’s most important internal struggle.

    Nyang quotes Chapter 3, verse 172, of the Koran: “Of those who answered the call of Allah and the messenger, even after being wounded, those who do right and refrain from wrong have a great reward.”

    But also in the holy scripture is a reference to “lower jihad,” a more earthly and physical—and controversial—struggle. “To those against whom war is made, permission is given [to fight] because they are wronged; and verily, God is most powerful for their aid,” quotes Nyang.

    This verse speaks of combat or war to be waged against one’s oppressors—a struggle sanctioned by God.

    But the Koran also states in Chapter 2, Verse 190: “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors.”

    The essence of the verse, Nyang says, is to fight back “if you are attacked by your persecutors, but don’t fight back indiscriminately. Follow the rules of engagement.” According to mainstream Muslim clerics, those “rules of engagement”‘ are explicit: women, children, and innocent civilians are off limits.

    Perversion of Text

    Muslims believe the prophet Mohammed received these revelations directly from God some 1400 years ago. It was at a time when he and other Muslims were being driven from their homes, persecuted, and killed. But although the Koran advocates self-defense, its most prevalent message is one of peace and brotherly love.

    “If people are intent on using religion to motivate terror or violence, they’ll find an excuse there no matter what the actual text says,” says David Rodier of American University in Washington, D.C., who is an expert on the world’s religions. Like the Koran, he says, most holy scriptures are filled with stories of war and warriors, and these images have been used throughout history by some members of every faith to justify bloodshed.

    “Religion, after all, speaks to our most basic and ultimate convictions, and if you are wanting to use violence, if you can find a religious justification, then you can find a very powerful motivation,” says Rodier.

    Christians have killed in the name of God, as have Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and others. But it is Muslims who have most recently been accused of turning “divine commandments” into a divine license to kill.

    Terrorists have often said they are striking out against their enemies and oppressors “in the name of Allah.” But many Islamic scholars say such terrorists are not only violating the spirit of the Koran, but the letter of it as well.

    “You do not kill innocent people, you do not cheat, you do not lie, you do not destroy any property of other human beings,” says Imam Abdullah Khouj, an Islamic scholar and director of the Islamic Center, in Washington, D.C.

    The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon “can’t be in the name of Allah,” he adds.

    “Violation of Allah’s Wishes”

    Islamic scholars interviewed by the TV news show National Geographic Today agreed that terrorists such as Usama bin Laden and his supporters are fanatics using Islam to further their own worldly causes.

    “In order for them to generate support beyond their small group, they have to latch onto universal symbols, and this is where Islam becomes a target of convenience for them,” says Nyang

    People combine pieces of verse from the Koran and use it to justify their actions, says Khouj. “But to understand the full meaning of the verse,” he says, “you have to read the one before it, the one after it, maybe five to six verses to get the full picture.”

    The “full picture” of Islam and the Koran, say Khouj and Nyang, is captured by Chapter 5, Verse 32: “[I]f anyone slew a person—unless it be for murder or spreading mischief in the land—it would be as if he slew the whole people. And if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.”

    For most Muslims, the callous and indiscriminate taking of human life violates Allah’s wishes. It defies the Koran’s central message and undermines the peace that Islam promises to deliver to all people.

    “Human life in Islam is extremely sacred,” says Khouj. “We’re not talking about just Muslim [life], but human life in general.”

    This article was excerpted from a one-hour special, “The Geography of Crisis,” aired by the TV news show National Geographic Today on September 25 at 8 p.m. EST.

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0925_TVkoran.html

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0925_TVkoran_2.html

  14. ——————————————————————————–
    Friends!!!
    We have seen –
    The quest to control base instincts such as greed, lust, and cruelty and to seek spiritual purity is known by Muslims as
    the “great jihad.” Featured widely in the Koran, the “great jihad” is a person’s most important internal struggle.

    So,

    1. U control ur biological desire and don’t harm a woman illegally
    2. U try not to hear bad things
    3. U try not to see bad things
    4. U try not to speak bad things
    5. U try not to do bad things

    These are also Jihad but not only self-defence(I will not say war here)

    And finally, once again:-

    “Human life in Islam is extremely sacred,” says Khouj. “We’re not talking about just Muslim [life], but human
    life in general.”

    But, if people misuse religion, what is the fault of religion??

    Culprit will rott in hell.

  15. To the best of my knowledge the panty bomber was not a poor uneducated young man. More of the ones caught are educated so the statement of Sarah’s ((((don’t know so much about Saudi but in the UK and Pakistan it is often the young men who are going through this development of ideas which are easily caught up in extremism. It is more prevalent among the less affluent, less educated or somehow dissaffected.)))) is wrong. I dont’ see this kind of action in any other faith. The Tabetian monks used to set themselves on fire but not anyone else.

  16. I dont’ see this kind of action in any other faith. The Tabetian monks used to set themselves on fire but not anyone else.

    ———————————————————————-

    @blooming in the sand

    What we see or hear is not the only reality. We need to update knowledge to know those things which we dnt hear.

    Search in google “Christian terrorist”, “Hindu Terrorist”, “Hindu Taliban”
    I have searched for u.

    Christian terrorist:

    http://www.google.com.sg/search?q=christian+terrorists&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

    Hindu Terrorist:

    http://www.google.com.sg/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Sfj&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&q=Hindu+Terrorists&btnG=Search

    Hindu Taliban:

    http://www.google.com.sg/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=v0O&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&q=Hindu+Taliban&btnG=Search

  17. Sikh terrorists:

    http://www.google.com.sg/search?q=Sikh+terrorists&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

    Reality is that sudden emergence of Muslim terrorists in last 2 decades after Gulf War, has sppressed all old terrorists groups from other faiths.

  18. @Blooming in the Sand,

    You said “I dont see this kind of action in any other faith”.

    I guess you missed the whole Bosnian civil war then? I suggest a quick search on google for the Orthodox priest blessing Serb fighters on their way to Sbrenecia where they massacred over ten thousand Muslim men and boys. In the video the Christian fighters are seen giving the three finger salute to symbolise the trinity in some Christian theology.

    Buddhist fighters from Japan during WW2 used their faith and belief in reincarnation to help justify and motivate suicide attacks on others and their own suicides.

    To say that “you dont see this in any other faith” means you either arent looking too hard or just dont want to see it.

    As to the education bit, the poor are usually used for the cannon fodder, as in any conflict. The most important missions and leadership positions are always held by those coming from the middle and upper classes with education.

    In this current round of Islamic extremism, this is no different than any other insurgent group in modern history.

  19. Good point about Sikh terrorists. I guess “Blooming in the Sand” wasnt aware that Skih terrorists blew up an Air India plane in Canada killing 329 people?

    Never mind BJP Hindu militants who use their Hindu faith as a justification to insight mass murder. These Hindu militants have directly and indirectly been the cause of thousands of deaths of innocent Muslims and Christians in India.

  20. Dear Abu Sinan,

    BJP is the political party which try to impletment Hindu ideology in parliament and policy makers are Hindu terrorists like RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh), VHP (Vishwa Hindu Parishad), BD(Bajrang Dal) have bombed a number of mosques(e.g. Makkah Masjid, Jama Masjid, Malegaon, Samjhauta train express, Ajmer Muslim shrine…still filling dots…earlier innocents Muslims were arrested and put in jail for these bombings and finally released after languising in jail for years) and destroyed so many chrisitans and raped and massacred 1000s of innocent christians and Muslims.

    Unfortunately none of these terrorists organsitiaons are illegal in India but legal in the eyes of govt and all these Hindu terrorist leaders have z-class security provided by govt.

    But there are millions of peace loving Hindus (specially lower caste Hindus) and non-Muslims and so its difficult for BJP to rule all over India even though they still rule so many states within India and main opposition party in central govt is BJP

  21. I think that everyone will question his/her beliefs as soon as these beliefs to some extent contradict his/her human nature. This clash between beliefs on one hand and emotions, desires and the human nature in general on the other hand prompts a person to be sceptic and doubtful of his/her beliefs. Buredah is the stronghold of Sahwa (radical religious movement). This religious movement was very radical and it certainly was against the basics of the human nature. Hence, doubts are activated in Al Niqedan’s state of mind. At this psychological state of mind, a person will try to put an end of his doubts in two different ways for the sake of his beliefs or his human nature. On one hand, he may give up his beliefs and convert to another faith which is usually atheism or another religion in case that a person’s doubts are religiously oriented. An example of people who chose this way is Abdullah Alqaseemy. Alqaseemy was very religious sheik and wrote some books defending Salafism. Then he become sceptic about his beliefs and wrote a series of books attacking God and the Islamic creed. He died sceptical and he was also born in Al Qaseem. On the other hand, the person will endorse his beliefs and fight any kinds of doubts about his/her beliefs. Fighing doubts takes different froms such as extrimism and attacking any different opinions. By this way, the person could become very extremist and violent in his behaviours and take actions against anyone questions his beliefs for sake of his beliefs and no return to doubts. The person will pass a long course of extremism but then doubts could come back to him and he will try mediate doubts and beliefs by inventing his own interpretations of faith to be more consistent with his/her human nature. There are also different reasons that make anyone gets extremist but I am speaking mainly about Al Niqidan’s case where beliefs and human nature were in clash and then mediated in a new personal version of beliefs.

  22. Thanks, Medina…and I’m glad you’re back!

  23. An interesting perspective, Medina. You describe a path of deepening development, or perhaps the back-and-forth sway of normal human nature. We cannot maintain a consistent level of involvement with any activity without needing to back off for respite from time to time. Rigidity at either extreme causes most of the sociological problems that are rooted in the matrix of religion.

  24. After seeing life sor some 40+ yrs i’ve come ot the conclusion that there are good and bad people, religion has nothing to do with them. if you’re good you’re good following any religion, the bad are bad no matter which religion they follow. People who take human life – even if it’s justified by their faith are bad. religion may or may not change them. seft -realization must come from within. for some when they look at someone they see life – irrespective of faith, some don’t.
    extreme followers are there in every faith, usually a weak mind led astry or a v.strong evil mind… every religion has a moderate set of values, but still some people choose to folow th eextreme, why? don’t blame the faith blame the idiots .

  25. I think it might border on slander to put Yusuf Islam’s name on something like that, even if it’s a joke. The man may be conservative, but as far as I know, he is peace-loving…

  26. MD, you really need to go back to the Quran and hadith and read them again. You have quoted a few verses but ignored many others that are, in the very least, vile and violent. Why?

    It is people like you that make the radical and terrorists possible. Until the good Muslims deal with the ‘hard issues’ there can be no peace because Muslims like you are dishonest and provide moral support to those who do evil. I wouldn’t care what the Quran says if Muslims were honest about the hate and violence in it – at which time they would say “yes, we have a problem”. To people like you, the problem is “some Muslims” not Islam. This problem is compounded by Western ignorance and political correctness.

    You make silly statements that have no basis in theology, history or fact. May I correct you?
    1. Quote: It was at a time when he and other Muslims were being driven from their homes, persecuted, and killed (really? and what did the Muslims do to others? Why don’t you mention Mohammed’s attacks on others?).
    2. Quote: But although the Koran advocates self-defense, its most prevalent message is one of peace and brotherly love (Hummmm? Where are no verses that tell Muslims to fight non-belivers? Or perhaps you can provide those verses that teach brotherly love with non-Muslims…)

    One last piece of advice: When you quote verse 5:32 (“[I]f anyone slew a person—unless it be for murder or spreading mischief in the land—it would be as if he slew the whole people. And if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.”) I suggest that you not use it around people that actually know the Quran. Why did you leave out parts of the verse? Does it say “anybody” or do you think that Allah got the verse wrong and you were correcting the text? Also, would you care to comment on the next verse (v.33) and explain how brutally torturing people fits in with your theory of “brotherly love”.

    Remember, Islam is not what you imagine it to be, or even what you want it to be — it is either what the Quran and ahadeeth say (and that can be very problematic) or it is what Muslims do (and you can add a few more problems there).

    Have a nice day.

    K.

  27. @Jay,

    You write “it is either what the Quran and ahadeeth say (and that can be very problematic) or it is what Muslims do (and you can add a few more problems there).”

    Very simplistic. This applies to any ideology, religion, ect. Putting the same lense to most of the people making such critiques would fail because 99 times out of a hundred they belong to religions that had texts that are FAR more problemtic than The Qur’an and Hadith, ie commandments from God to commit genocide or commands to murder homosexuals as in The Bible.

    It rings even more hollow coming from someone in the West. Islam has nothing in it’s history that can match 400 hundred years of Western colonialism and imperialism with the tens of millions slaughtered in those centuries. Islam has nothing that matches the 50 million plus killed during WW2, never mind the single minded genocide of six million Jews by Europeans during the Holocaust.

    We could bang on and on about hundreds of thousands killed during religious wars in Europe, millions killed in WW2, during the reformation, Napoleon wars. We could talk about American support for murders death squads in Central and South America that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands, or even US support for Saddam Hussein whilst he was gassing Kurds in Northern Iraq. Those in glass houses shouldnt throw sotnes.

    Yes, we Muslims have some serious issues to deal with it, but I am happy to say that we can and will deal with it on our own. And if history holds true, we’ll do it with A LOT less bloodshed than has been done in the West.

    You might think your critque is helpful, but it isnt.

    Muslims face no more or no less a challenge than any other group/religion/ethnicity has. The change will happen from within, by Muslims. Shrieking harpy voices of hatred from outside the Muslim world only give aid and comfort to the cavemen who would twist our religion.

    If your intention is to give and comfort to Bin Laden and his lik, by all means, continue in your path.

  28. @Jay,
    I think you were overly harsh in your judgement of MD. He was saying that he was against extremism and quoted a verse to demonstrate that Islam values all life as sacred.

    Your statement ‘It is people like you that make the radical and terrorists possible’ was unjust and uinbalanced and reflects poorly on your judgement. So are you saying that even those Muslims who condemn terrorism are themselves creating it? What a warped perception.

    As for the verse 5:32 it does indeed say whoso ever’ or anyone. It is not addressing the subject of war so is slightly off topic but it was not misquoted. As for verse 33 you describe it as ‘brutal torture’. Rubbish. It describes the punnishment for making war and disorder which is they will be killed (in battle), be executed, have their hands or feet cut off or be expelled from the land. These are punishments for waging war. Not all punishments need be exercised they are in varying degrees according to the severity of the crime. It also says ‘who wage war against Allah and His Messanger’ so has a time context too. How can you wage a war against a person who has passed away?

    The punnishments may not be pretty but many countries have similar ones (the US still uses the death penalty in some states). But they are not torture.

    Torture is depriving and humiliating people and removing their human rights in any form but also including water boarding, posing them in sexual positions, forcing them to commit sexual acts on members of the same sex, keeping them in solitary, darkened confinement for months on end. Prolonging their humiliation. Refusing to grant them a trial and holding them without recourse to any law, etc It is not comparable to a swift punishment at all.

    So no, the Quran does not advocate ‘brutal torture’ and certainly does not promote the action committed in our (myself being British) name by the the US and UK governments.

  29. 005.032
    On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
    005.033
    : The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

    Hmm….so crucifixtion, cutting of hands and feet is not a torture. I see.

  30. Torture still exists in the Middle East and in most Muslim countries – just ask those who have experienced it. The West did not bring it to this part of the world. It is ridiculous to say that all Muslim conquests were bloodless and that all the people who suddenly found themselves under Muslim rule as Islam spread across continents performed happy dances – just as Christian colonialism was not welcomed with open arms, To always make out the West as the
    bad guy” is simply empty rhetoric one can hear and read on certain news channels and in newspapers across the Middle East on a daily – hourly – basis. The West is blamed for everything from soup to nuts. “We were great before blah, blah, blah.” My husband, who is Muslim, does not romanticize such things. People act badly around the world. Muslims are no better than Christians…and just the opposite. You talk in degrees – well, we didn’t murder as many people as YOU did.” Yes, “we may cut off hands and feet, blind people, behead, and stone people to death, but we don’t torture” is ridiculous. All of the above IS torture. Waterboarding, solitary confinement, held without trial, rape, etc. ALL exist in this part of the world. ALL OF IT and more…much more….sigh. We should stop demonizing each other. We both have a lot to answer for…

  31. @AK,
    I was not attacking the West I was pointing out something which is not good which they do. How many times has the phrase ‘Islam is as Islam does’ or something similar been used in various comments? Cannot the same be said in reverse ‘The west is as the West does’? Why cannot the same standard be applied to analysing all situations? Why would Islam be an exception?

    I actually agree with your statement that there are good and bad in everyone. Unfortunately, the bad section is increasing within Islam. I have no problem looking at the issue and saying what I see is wrong and where change can or could be made,

    I just wanted to defend a statement which Jay made about torture and the Quran. I was trying to illustrate that I don’t think punnishment is the same as torture. As for crucifixion, it is interesting to see that word used because I am aware of beheadings but not of Muslims using a cross to perform capital punnishment.

  32. @AK,

    I dont deny anything you said, but it is almost always Westerners who act like their “stuff” dont stink. It does, and numbers wise, nothing in humanity matches it.

    You also mention about torture, but we do that here in the USA until pretty recently. When we didnt want to do it we simply handed over people to those who would do it. No better.

    Anyway, what I said was to keep things in perspective and to remind those here in the West that either dont know, or have forgotten, our own history. We have VERY little room to preach to anyone. We have ZERO room to try and step in and tell people how to do things.

    The Muslim world will have to sort itself out. There is nothing that the West can do to help or make it better, usually the opposite. When the West gets involved it makes it worse, ie support for Saddam Hussein, Shah of Iran, jihadis/bin Laden in Afghanistan, ect.

  33. Abu Sinan,
    That particular book by Robert Spencer makes sense. I am not saying the same for all his writings. Read it with an open mind.

    The trouble is that the extremist Islam is operating in our own times and not in history. The West did act violently in history, but now the West has changed ideologically.

    We are dealing with extremist Islam on a global level in our own times, that’s why we are talking about it.

    I don’t really see the moderate Muslims doing anything concrete to reform from within and kill extremism. They are not violent themselves, but they don’t allow any crticism of the extremist Muslims to happen. They don’t dissociate themselves from the extremists, who remain part of the Umma.

    In contrast to this, there are millions of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Sikhs and atheists who criticise the wrongdoings of their own people and try to seriously reform the society from within.

    I don’t see this kind of self-criticism happening in the Islamic Umma.

    And yes, people from outside have every right to criticise the Islamic extremism, because it is the “outsiders” who suffer the Islamic extremism.

    That’s what Jay meant when he said it is people like MD who create terrorists – everytime a criticism of terrorism or extremism comes from somewhere, millions of MDs stand up to stop the criticism.

    MD is not the only one I have seen making these statements. I have come across hundreds of moderate Muslims arguing in the same vein.

    I don’t see any reform from within taking place with this kind of attitude of Muslims.

  34. When you say that “it is almost always Westerners who act like their “stuff” don’t stink,” I have to differ with you. I have lived in the Middle East quite a long time. Westerners are constantly blamed for the woes of the world. “Infidels” are demonized. Western women are “whores” while Muslim women are chaste and pure. I have heard the most incredibly outrageous, beyond bizarre conspiracy theories here. People actually say (with a straight face) that Muslims can’t possibly commit wrong-doings! It just isn’t possible, since the Quran says they can’t. Ummmm…just pick up any paper over in this part of the world and you will read countless articles that put the West in a bad light – many, many more than you will find in newspapers in the States. We both do a pretty good job of throwing our sins in each other’s faces…

  35. @Daisy,

    The trouble is that the extremist Islam is operating in our own times and not in history. The West did act violently in history, but now the West has changed ideologically.

    Really? Are you seriously saying this statement?

  36. @AK,

    I dont know where you are getting this stuff from. Where in The Qur’an does it say “Muslims can’t possible commit wrong doings”? It doesnt! If you dislike the Middle East so much….leave!

    @Daisy,

    I guess some of what David Duke writes about African Americans makes sense right? Some of what Adolf Hitler wrote about Jews makes sense? Robert Spencer and his ilk have an agenda that is VERY anti-Muslim. Him and those around him support far right racist groups, even politicians in Holland who would actually BAN The Qur’an.

    If you want this guy and his likes to be your guidance, then it is NO wonder why you spout the stuff you do!

    I guess it doesnt really matter if YOU dont see moderate Muslims doing stuff to fight Islam. You are NOT a Muslim and you gain your information from those who hate Muslims and hate Islam and have their own twisted agenda. So of course you wouldnt see it.

    You are actually posting on a site of a moderate Muslim doing what she can to make a difference. Carol is a “moderate Muslim” and I think she is one of those people you claim not to see. For someone who doesnt see moderate Muslims, you sure do post on their venues a lot.

    As a Muslim myself, I do see it. It isnt as much as I would like, but every movement has to start somewhere! I wonder, you are so worried about Muslim extremists, what exactly are you doing about Hindu extremism which is rising in India? What steps are you taking, as a Hindu, to battle the extremists within your own religion, or does that not matter to you?

    I heard a report about Hindu men forming committees and wondering places like Mumbai and attacking Hindus who are dressed immodestly and attacking Hindus who are friends of Muslims. Does that bother you?

    It makes me wonder why so many people will ignore what their own people are doing and what is happening in their own countries and focus on other people’s issues.

    I think you should clear up your own house before you worry about others.

    Us Muslims, we’ll do it on our own. Police and worry about what is happening in your country. Thousands of people, Christians and Muslims, have been murdered by Hindu extremists in India. When you figure that one out, move on to the next issue.

    As I said before, the “help” you offer does more harm than good and actually works in favour of the Islamic extremists. If your goal is to further Islamic extremism Daisy, by all means keep it up!

  37. @Sarah,

    Daisy cannot see the forest for the trees. The West killed around 1,000,000 Iraqis during the embargo. That is hardly history. The West has killed around 500,000 in Iraq since the latest invasion..again hardly history. Christians in Europe slaughter a 100,000 Muslims, this in the last 20 years.

    The West, and the imperial mindset, along with Christian extremism, has killed tonnes of people in the developing world and Muslim world RECENTLY. Christian extremists work hand in hand with Jewish extremists to commit war crimes and collective punishment in Israel and Palestine. This is happening as we speak.

    Daisy needs to open her eyes to reality.

  38. Abu Sinan:

    “I dont know where you are getting this stuff from. Where in The Qur’an does it say “Muslims can’t possible commit wrong doings”? It doesnt! If you dislike the Middle East so much….leave!”

    You know, My husband and I laughed and predicted you’d say that very thing! Ha! Why are you in the West, may I ask? Anyway, I didn’t say that it says those words in the Qur’an, I said people have those sentiments and write it in letters to the editor over here – constantly. I don’t dislike the Middle East, Abu Sinan…I love many aspects of it, including its people. Why is it when anyone criticizes your culture, you react in such an extreme way? I think it is the collectivist kind of attitude versus individualist that we have in the States. We believe that we can question authority, criticize freely..and STILL love our country – at least those who believe in the Constitution do..Tea Party people? Not so much. Anyway, I don’t belong to the Muslim haters crowd, as much as you’d like to lump me into that category…but I AM aware of the problems over here in this part of the world and know what is happening in terms of propaganda. I really DO want to know why you are living in the West if you hate it so much. Ha! Sound stupid to you, too?

  39. AK,

    Critise “my culture”? Which culture is that? I predicted you’d say something like that! I am not an Arab, nor am I am Middle Easterner. So I guess you cannot go back to that old cannard to try and deflect things.

    I am an American citizen, originally born in Europe. I have traveled all around the world and I am more interested in the truth than I am in furthering one particular ideology. My ancestors are German, I am blond haired, blue eyed, over six foot and rather white.

    I am in the West because I am a Westerner. Do I need a reason to be in my own country? What, am I a traitor to the West because I am open and honest with our own history and issues? Why should nationality and what you think be governed by where you come from? The truth is the truth, it doesnt matter where you come from.

    By automatically assuming that I am not from the West you have shown your own prejudice. Time for you, and the hubby, to rethink you invalid assumptions.

    Talk about ME lumping you into a category! LOL! Pot…..meet kettle.

    Anyway, I feel free to criticise anyone and I everyone I want to. Freedom is like that. Sometimes the truth hurts and certainly, as we have just seen in your case, shatters people’s own ideas and prejudices.

    What, because I go by a “kunya” online and am honest about the West and their actions, but current and historical, I MUST not be a Western.

    Think again…….about a lot of things.

    Sounds stupid to you? Yep, most of your comment did because it was founded on an assumption that you made with no facts.

    As to hating the West, I am far from hating the West. I am, however, honest about our history and what we have done to the world. The town I was born in was almost completely massacred and wiped out during on the many religious wars in Europe. That is “hate” it is history.

    I am an American Muslim, but love my American freedoms and love my European heritage. A proud member of the Goethe-Institut, amoungst other Western cultural organisations. You have boxed yourself into a corner with your prejudiced and preconcieved notions.

    You’d do yourself a favour by moving outside those boxes.

  40. Abu Sinan: Now, you are really ridiculous! Have you ever lived in the Middle East? if you have, then you know how things are done here and how people are fed information by government – owned or censored departments. You should also know that there is a very violent history here. We Westerners do not have a lock on violence, Abu Sinan. There IS no freedom. Period. Yes, I assumed you were Muslim…and knew you lived in the West. I had no idea what your nationality was, nor did I care. I still don’t. I am not in the least prejudiced, nor am I close-minded. You have absolutely no reason to even assume it. . I do feel you have a chip on your shoulder a mile wide…and feel insecure about being Muslim in the West, otherwise why do you feel the need to constantly regurgitate all the West’s history of war and colonialism. You don’t think we know it, or what? I am certainly not proud of everything my country as done in the past or currently. I protest against actions I do not agree with. Unfortunately, people over here are not given that opportunity. “Shatters my ideas and prejudices”? You really are histrionic. Let me assure you – you shattered nothing. I do think my husband knows quite a bit more than you do about growing up Muslim in this part of the world. I think I will listen to him. Thanks, anyway.

  41. @Jay/Daisy,

    It is people like you that make the radical and terrorists possible.

    ——————————————————

    Do u know what is tafseer? what is commentary for Quranic verses?

    So according to you, I should not discuss any verses from Quran that tells not to harm innocents? But I should hide these verses but promote violent verses (which were revealed for battle field) and justify Osama Bin Laden and Taliban like u do?? U mean I should apply battle field verses on norman daily life and create more and more extremism? Simple I should learn from u who cant digest peaceful verses from Quran but love to promote and spread only war related vesrses and forcefully try to apply these warfield verses in daily normal life and support bombing in train and market? Sorry I cant justify Taliban and Osama as expected by Daisy and U.

    Or is it that people like u cant see any good and peaceful things in Quran, Muslim, Islam?

    Quran came 1400 years back. Then why Islamic terroism suddenly just grew like Tsunami after Gulf war? Why not continuously since 1400 years? Why people like u dnt see the root cause of rise of Islamic terroirsm? Why people like u dnt condemn bombing from sky while innocent women and children are sleeping? A bomb kills 10, 20, 30, 100 but how many innocents are killed when bombing from sky? And how many are killed by missiles shoots in busy city/market? Can u pleaese calculate and tell me?
    What people like u does is bringing battle field vesrses from Quran and mock at Islam and connive bombing from sky?

    I think u need to look back and check how many Muslims bombers killed and how many innocents were killed by people of other faiths. Check % involvement of Muslims in killing innocents:

    FOUNDERS OF TERRORISM
    160 million people died in wars during the 20th century

    1860-65: American civil war (360,000)
    1886-1908: Belgium-Congo Free State (3 million)
    1899-02: British-Boer war (100,000)
    1899-03: Colombian civil war (120,000)
    1899-02: Philippines vs USA (20,000)
    1900-01: Boxer rebels against Russia, Britain, France, Japan, USA against rebels (35,000)
    1903: Ottomans vs Macedonian rebels (20,000)
    1904: Germany vs Namibia (65,000)
    1904-05: Japan vs Russia (150,000)
    1910-20: Mexican revolution (250,000)
    1911: Chinese Revolution (2.4 million)
    1911-12: Italian-Ottoman war (20,000)
    1912-13: Balkan wars (150,000)
    1915: the Ottoman empire slaughters Armenians (1.2 million)
    1915-20: the Ottoman empire slaughters 500,000 Assyrians
    1916-23: the Ottoman empire slaughters 350,000 Greek Pontians and 480,000 Anatolian Greeks

    1914-18: World War I (20 million)
    1916: Kyrgyz revolt against Russia (120,000)
    1917-21: Soviet revolution (5 million)
    1917-19: Greece vs Turkey (45,000)
    1919-21: Poland vs Soviet Union (27,000)
    1928-37: Chinese civil war (2 million)
    1931: Japanese Manchurian War (1.1 million)
    1932-33: Soviet Union vs Ukraine (10 million)
    1934: Mao’s Long March (170,000)
    1936: Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia (200,000)
    1936-37: Stalin’s purges (13 million)
    1936-39: Spanish civil war (600,000)
    1937-45: Japanese invasion of China (500,000)
    1939-45: World War II (55 million) including holocaust and Chinese revolution
    1946-49: Chinese civil war (1.2 million)
    1946-49: Greek civil war (50,000)
    1946-54: France-Vietnam war (600,000)
    1947: Partition of India and Pakistan (1 million)
    1947: Taiwan’s uprising against the Kuomintang (30,000)
    1948-1958: Colombian civil war (250,000)
    1948-1973: Arab-Israeli wars (70,000)

    1949-: Indian Muslims vs Hindus (20,000)
    1949-50: Mainland China vs Tibet (1,200,000)
    1950-53: Korean war (3 million)
    1952-59: Kenya’s Mau Mau insurrection (20,000)
    1954-62: French-Algerian war (368,000)
    1958-61: Mao’s “Great Leap Forward” (38 million)
    1960-90: South Africa vs Africa National Congress (?)
    1960-96: Guatemala’s civil war (200,000)
    1962-75: Mozambique Frelimo vs Portugal (?)
    1964-73: USA-Vietnam war (3 million)
    1966-69: Mao’s “Cultural Revolution” (11 million)
    1966-: Colombia’s civil war (31,000)
    1967-70: Nigeria-Biafra civil war (800,000)
    1968-80: Rhodesia’s civil war (?)
    1969-: Philippines vs New People’s Army (40,000)
    1969-79: Idi Amin, Uganda (300,000)
    1969-02: IRA – Norther Ireland’s civil war (2,000)
    1969-79: Francisco Macias Nguema, Equatorial Guinea (50,000)
    1972: Burundi’s civil war (300,000)

    1972-79: Rhodesia/Zimbabwe’s civil war (30,000)
    1974-91: Ethiopian civil war (1,000,000)
    1975-78: Menghitsu, Ethiopia (1.5 million)
    1975-79: Khmer Rouge, Cambodia (1.7 million)
    1975-89: Boat people, Vietnam (250,000)
    1975-90: civil war in Lebanon (40,000)
    1975-87: Laos’ civil war (184,000)
    1975-2002: Angolan civil war (500,000)
    1976-83: Argentina’s military regime (20,000)
    1976-93: Mozambique’s civil war (900,000)
    1977-92: El Salvador’s civil war (75,000)
    1979: Vietnam-China war (30,000)
    1979-88: the Soviet Union invades Afghanistan (1.3 million)
    1980-88: Iraq-Iran war (1 million)
    1980-92: Sendero Luminoso – Peru’s civil war (69,000)
    1981-90: Nicaragua vs Contras (60,000)
    1982-90: Hissene Habre, Chad (40,000)
    1983-2002: Sri Lanka’s civil war (64,000)
    1983-2002: Sudanese civil war (2 million)

    1986-: Indian Administrated Kashmir’s civil war (90,000)
    1987-: Palestinian Intifada (4,500)
    1988-2001: Afghanistan civil war (400,000)
    1988-2004: Somalia’s civil war (550,000)
    1989-: Liberian civil war (220,000)
    1989-: Uganda vs Lord’s Resistance Army (30,000)
    1991: Gulf War – large coalition against Iraq to liberate Kuwait (85,000)
    1991-97: Congo’s civil war (800,000)
    1991-2000: Sierra Leone’s civil war (200,000)
    1991-: Russia-Chechnya civil war (200,000)
    1991-94: Armenia-Azerbaijan war (35,000)
    1992-96: Tajikstan’s civil war war (50,000)
    1992-96: Yugoslavian wars (260,000)
    1992-99: Algerian civil war (150,000)
    1993-97: Congo Brazzaville’s civil war (100,000)
    1993-2005: Burundi’s civil war (200,000)
    1994: Rwanda’s civil war (900,000)
    1995-: Pakistani Sunnis vs Shiites (1,300)
    1995-: Maoist rebellion in Nepal (12,000)
    1998-: Congo/Zaire’s war – Rwanda and Uganda vs Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia (3.8 million)
    1998-2000: Ethiopia-Eritrea war (75,000)
    1999: Kosovo’s liberation war – NATO vs Serbia (2,000)
    2001-: Afghanistan’s liberation war – USA & UK vs Taliban (40,000)
    2002-: Cote d’Ivoire’s civil war (1,000)
    2003: Iraq’s liberation war – USA, UK and Australia vs Saddam Hussein (14,000)

    2003-: Sudan vs JEM/Darfur (200,000)
    2003-: Iraq’s civil war (60,000

    Arab-Israeli wars
    I (1947-49): 6,373 Israeli and 15,000 Arabs die
    II (1956): 231 Israeli and 3,000 Egyptians die
    III (1967): 776 Israeli and 20,000 Arabs die
    IV (1973): 2,688 Israeli and 18,000 Arabs die
    Intifada I (1987-92): 170 Israelis and 1,000 Palestinians
    Intifada II (2000-03): 700 Israelis and 2,000 Palestinians

    big question
    who plans and funds these wars?????????

    Shame of hypcrites who create terrorists by victimising innocents!!

  42. I don’t really see the moderate Muslims doing anything concrete to reform from within and kill extremism. They are not violent themselves, but they don’t allow any crticism of the extremist Muslims to happen. They don’t dissociate themselves from the extremists, who remain part of the Umma.

    In contrast to this, there are millions of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Sikhs and atheists who criticise the wrongdoings of their own people and try to seriously reform the society from within.

    ———————————————–
    @Daisy,

    Only a person who doesnt have updated knowledge or some1 who is in state of “LIVING IN DENIAL and UNABILITY TO ACCEPT TRUTH” can say such baseless statement.

    Let me open ur brain and see the voice of Muslims against terroirsts:

    “Fatwa against terrorists”

    http://www.google.com.sg/search?q=Fatwa+against+terrorism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

    Now u have to see ur face in mirror and reply.

    Is there any Muslim country which legalise and give z-class security to Muslim terrorists like Osama or groups like Taliban? Which laws in world give security and legal support to Taliban, Al-Qaida? Where is open training centre for Al-Qaida?

    Why millions of Hindus support biggest (largest in members in world) Hindu terrorist group like RSS, VHP(Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Bajrang Dal? At least why they are not illegal in the eyes of law if Hindu terrorists dont have supporters even after number of bombing and raping/killing 1000s of Muslims/Christians? Why these Hindu terrorists leaders get z-class, govt security? Why there is open legal Hindu terrorist training centre? Why millions of Hindu support Hindu terrorists financially and emotionally? From where they get financial source if rich Hindus dont support them?

    I am not saying all HIndus support them.

  43. Dear AK,

    I am sure u are not Islam hater.
    May be what u say is right in middle east media. But u also need to see media outside middle east. When a Muhammad Bilal rapes his daughter, media says in front page with bold letter that “Muslim father rapes daughter” but when an Anthony rapes his daughter,the world “Chrisitianity” never came in media. Smilarly, when gunmen shoots and kills in US university, “Christianity” is not highligted but when Muslim does “Islam” comes in headlines.

    If u want proof let me know.

    Also u will see how many anti-Islamic sites and anti-christianity, anti-Hinduism sites in internet world and check the hatred level of different faiths.

  44. Md. Azad Ali Shah:

    Yes, you are right – I am definitely not an Islam hater. I greatly respect the Islamic religion and am proud to be married to a Muslim man. Just as in any religion, there are those who do not follow the teachings of their faith. When I was growing up, I had difficulty understanding hypocrites in my Christian community. I feel the same in the Muslim community, as well. If we all really lived according to our faiths, we wouldn’t have such a messed up world. My husband is kind, non-violent, and tolerant. He constantly disagrees with a lot of the “talk” he hears around him…it saddens him that, in his view, many people have strayed from the “true” message of Islam. The same can be said of many Christians as well. When I read and hear hateful, intolerant rhetoric from so-called Christians, I think back to my mother who lived her faith and treated everyone with respect and love….She looked out for others and did not judge anyone. It is so different now.
    I understand what you are saying about the media highlighting a criminal’s religion if he is Muslim, That is not right. The internet is filled with hate…sometimes it shocks me.

  45. Lets see FRESH today’s news that cant spread like Islamic terrorism.

    ==============================================

    WELL EDUCATED HINDU TERRORIST BOMBERS TRIED TO KILL MUSLIM VICE-PRESIDENT OF INDIA:

    ==============================================

    These Hindu terroirst bombers include one doctor, one professor, one Member of parliament. Thank GOd, at least Muslim terrorist dont sit in parliament anywhere in world.
    Plan to bomb/kill Muslims were done in HIndu temple.

    News u cant miss :

    http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/105546/saffron-brigades-terror-plots-exposed.html?page=1

  46. @AK,

    I havent lived in the Middle East but I have traveled there extensively, am married to a Saudi woman and have dealt extensively with members of the Saudi government. I am VERY aware of how things work there. The wasta and reshwa system has plagued my dealings with the region for years. What I dislike is the fact that so many here, and on other venues, act as if violence and the history of violence beings and ends in Muslim countries. The facts and history show that is far from the case. My point was to bring some balance to the conversation that was SORELY lacking and I did so.

    Many in the West like to teach and lecture, as if something in our history gives us a right to do so. It does not. There is a violent history in the Middle East, sure. Can you point out one country in the worl where this isnt a violent history? I am probably the LAST person that would defend the governments of the Middle East, or even the cultures. I am well known here for bashing the governments of the Middle East and being very critical of the societies. However, to be honest with myself I know that we here in the West have a worse history when it comes to violence. WW1, WWW2, Religious wars in European from 1500 onwards, colonialism of Africa, South American, Central American, North America, the width and bredth of Asia. All of these events show that we are not in a position to lecture anyone nor do we provide anything near to a good role model.

    I love America and our freedoms, at the same time it is hard to reconcile our freedoms with carpet bombing in Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam, embargos in Iraq that killed 1,000,000 people and support for an Israeli government, the likes of which hasnt been seen except shortly after the Weimar Republic in Germany.

    I dont feel insecure about being a Muslim in the West, far from it. I feel it is the only place in the world, including the “Muslim world” where I am free to practice my faith as I see fit. I dont even have the same freedom of worship, as a Muslim, in Muslim countries. So you could be farther off the mark.

    I am not sure if you really know your history or not, because if you really did I dont think you could go on like you have here with a straight face. Or maybe you arent, you are just laughing behind the screen? It is obvious you thought I was a Muslim from a Muslim country. You even asked why I lived in the West, with the assumption being that I immigrated here, why not just go back to where I came from! Sorry, but I am a Muslim American with European background and I am VERY aware of MY history and I am very aware of how that history would cause any rational person to temper any advise they might tend to want to give others. Sure, I have wondered allowed here and in person when people from the various Middle Eastern countries and the Muslim world in general, are going to stand up and fight for their freedom like our founding fathers here did. But I am not so filled with the idea that the West is superior that I would tell others what such resistance would have to look like and what the end out come would be. Our democracy is imperfect and was co-founded on slavery, mass murder and genocide.

    Revert back to the whole “my hubby knows more than you” playground routine if you want. I guess I could have pointed to my wife, daughter of a Saudi diplomat, niece of a Saudi general and tried to make some irrational claim that somehow that proves my point or something. Ask yourself the question you asked me. If you dislike the Middle East so much and have zero freedoms………who in their right mind, especially a woman, would choose to give up their freedoms like that?

  47. Aha latest news, these HIndu terrorists ransacked and attacked this media house for exposing their terrorism

  48. Sigh…Abu Sinan, please don’t assume you know what I am thinking. I did not know whether you were a Westerner or whether you were from some other country, and frankly, I didn’t care. Your rhetoric just showed that you were ashamed of much about the West’s handling of other countries…that is all. I, also, do not like wars begun by anyone. I abhor violence – was against the Vietnam War, as well as the Iraq War. I asked you why you remained in the West as a response to YOU telling me I should LEAVE the Middle East if I don’t like some of the things I have found here. My question was tongue in cheek and asked to show you how silly your response was, which clearly reminded me of the doofuses in the 1960s and 70s who demanded protesters to “Love America or Leave it.” You assumed that I asked it because I thought you had immigrated – wrong again. I asked it, not only to illustrate how crazy it was for you to tell me to leave the M.E,. but also because you seemed so displeased with not only recent activities brought on by the US and European goverments, but also over hundreds of years. I hear, so often, of everything wrong with the West…yet, millions flock there. I have a love/hate relationship there, just as I do here… It’s a qaundary.

  49. @AK,

    I don’t think it’s a quandry, I think it is honesty. It’s not necessary to agree with everything or everyone, we can say what is good and bad in all people/places.

    I love this quote I heard Christopher Hitchens use the other day

    ‘you wont find Utopia on any map of Earth’ – how true.

    It is the extremists who deal only in black and white and dont see any shades of grey who really dont have any depth to their view of the world. Seeing the world as ‘us’ and ‘them’ just makes it possible to dehumanise or demonise others and when this happens and we stop seeing all people as humans that is when extremism takes root. The quote MD used above shows that our value as humans and the sanctity that everyone’s life holds is greater than any label of ethnicity, nationality or religion.

  50. MD, pay attention and learn. I wrote his several years ago. It is my work, not cut and pasted from some website. I spent about a month on this and what I am posting here is an abbreviated version of a study I did.

    I will explain ‘jihad’ to you. Here is how a Muslim site explains jihad (www.quranicstudies.com). The root of the Arabic word “jihad” is “juhd” which means “effort.” Another related word is “ijtihad” which means “working hard or diligently.” Jihad is simply the process of “exerting the best efforts,” involving some form of “struggle” and “resistance,” to achieve a particular goal. In other words, jihad is the struggle against, or resistance to, something for the sake of a goal. The meaning of the word is independent of the nature of the invested efforts or the sought goal. So, Jihad means struggle, striving or effort. Period. The word itself does not imply what type of struggle and is not implicitly linked to violence or war. The word jihad itself also does not involve any concept of self-defense, neither does it implicitly relate to a person’s effort for self-control, nor does it imply any idea of resistance. These meanings go beyond the basic dimension of the meaning of the word. The question is then: What type of struggle is jihad? Well, the best answer is to look at how it is used in the Quran, the ahadith and among Muslim leaders. The problem is obviously not the word jihad, the problem is the concept jihad.

    Depending upon the source, you may find that the word jihad is used between zero and thirty times in the Koran. Some Islamic sites like to say that the work “jihad” never appears in the Quran, which is true because many English translations use the words “struggle” and “strive” or other synonyms instead. However, most Arabic experts tell us that the word jihad and its variations is used about 30 times in the Koran (I will give you my list if you want to check). Notice how vague and ambiguous this word is. What is all this “striving in the way of Allah” about? It doesn’t sound like a self-control problem. It doesn’t appear to be a matter of self defense. The only resistance would be that which is to be overcome by the “striving”. Darn it, what is this striving all about?
    Lets look at this “struggle” in the Quran:
    1. Notice that this struggle is against unbelievers because they are unbelievers – not because they are attacking Muslims or doing evil. Here are some verses… (9.73) O Prophet! Jahidi (do jihad) against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh to them; and their abode is hell, an evil destination . See also 9.86 and 25.52 (I am not going to quote the whole text in the interest of space, but I expect you to check. All these verses use a form of the noun jihad).
    2. Notice how many of these verses require that the Muslim leave home to do his “struggle” or require they give their property and themselves to the “struggle” Here is a verse: (4.95) Not equal are the believers who have no impediment who stay [at home] and al-mujahiduna (those who do jihad) in the way of Allah with their properties and selves. Allah has favored al-mujahidina (those who do jihad) with their properties and selves above those who stay [at home]”. Also check verse (9.81) Those who were left behind were glad to stay home and not join the Messenger of Allah. They were averse to yujahidu (do jihad) with their properties and selves.

    3. Notice that this “struggle” in the way of Allah may get a person killed, violently. Check this verse: (3.142) Do you [O you who believe!] think that you will enter paradise before Allah has known those who jahadu (did jihad) and the patient among you…”

    Another common word in the Quran is “qital.” This term (and its variations) mean “fighting”, as here: (4.74) Falyuqatil (then let) those who sell this world’s life for the hereafter (fight) in the way of Allah. And whoever yuqatil (fights) in the way of Allah so he gets killed or turns victorious, We shall grant him a great reward. Or this verse: (2:216) Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. Same idea, different word. Jihad carries a more spiritual dimension (ie, fighting in the way of Allah), as compared to the more physical aspect of qital, which also is done ‘in the way of Allah.’ In any event, be it through jihad or qital, the desired result is dead or conquered infidels.

    4. There is the matter of the whole chapter in the Quran called “The Spoils of War.” Now isn’t that nice! And where do these “Spoils of war” come from? Do they fall from the sky? Or could it be, maybe, who knows, perhaps, the result of “Jihad”? Take a wild guess! Here are a few verses from Surah 8 in the Quran, The Spoils or War, (called “Al-Anfal” in Arabic): (Verse 12) I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them. (Verse 41) And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah, and to the Messenger. (Verse 67) It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land. (Pickthall)

    FYI, Here is one of the sites I use: http://www.quranbrowser.com with 8 different English language translations, or this one, with 15+ translations: http://islamawakened.org/quran/8/67/default.htm. Note these are Muslims sites.

    5. So, how do the ahadith use the word ‘jihad’? Here are a few quotes from the MSA (Muslim Student Association) site at USC (University of Southern California): Allah’s Apostle was asked, “What is the best deed?” He replied, “To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, “What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, “To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah’s Cause” http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/001.002.025

    Or this: It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Qatada that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) stood up among them (his Companions) to deliver his sermon in which he told them that Jihad in the way of Allah and belief in Allah (with all His Attributes) are the most meritorious of acts. A man stood up and said: Messenger of Allah, do you think that if I am killed in the way of Allah, my sins will be blotted out from me? The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Yes.
    http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/020.4645

    So, MD, bad news! In every instance the word jihad is used in the ahadith it only means “Holy war against infidels”. You cannot read the Traditions without stumbling over jihad on about every other page. Here is a link to a search of hadith at the University of Southern California: Put in the word “jihad” and check all the references. See if you can find any verses among the hundreds found that do NOT signify “Holy war against infidels”. http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/search.html

    6. So how do modern Muslims use the word ‘jihad’? Well, the highest Islamic authorities in Arabia and Egypt apparently don’t know that jihad means “Inner Struggle” and instead use it to mean “Holy war against infidels”. Bummer. The fact is that this word is found on tens of thousands of Muslim websites and 99.9% of the time it is used to mean “Holy War.”

    In summary, Islam is the only religion with a doctrine, theology and legal system that mandates warfare against unbelievers (well, hum, there is Joshua and pals in the old testament!). This warfare is called jihad. Hundreds of verses in the Quran deal with fighting unbelievers “in the way of Allah”. All able-bodied Muslims are required to join this fight (2:216) to “instill terror into the hearts of the unbeliever” and to “smite above their necks” (8:12). If a Muslims cannot leave home, he/she is required to aid those who do (8:74). Fighting infidels is a “test” of loyalty to Allah (not good acts or faith in general) and martyrdom resulting from fighting unbelievers (47:4) is the only real assurance of salvation in Islam (4:74; 9:111). In fact, all the sins of any Muslim who dies in this fighting are forgiven (4:96). Muslim martyrs (in the Islamic sense) are rewarded with virgins, among other carnal delights, in Paradise (38:51, 55:56; 55:76; 56:22). The final command revealed to Muhammad in the Quran, was to conquer the world in the name of Islam (9:29). Yet Muslims tell us that Islam is a “Religion of Peace” and jihad is not really about war. So, from all the evidence above, Jihad is clearly about fighting and killing infidels to spread Islam. That is how it was used 1300 years ago, that is how it is usually used today.

    That is it for now. In 1500 words I explained jihad! Note the references and links. Well, got to work. Later I will answer your post detailing all the evils done by us infidels (wars, killing and such things). In fact, I will petty much agree with you. Note that I have no problem condemning anybody for evils done, whether a Biblical figure, a pope or preacher, Buddhists, Americans, Colonialists, Bush, Crusaders, Bugs Bunny, and so on. I don’t play the “they are evil, too” game. If something is wrong, it is wrong from everybody. Do you understand what I am saying?

    See you later.

    K.

    PS: According to one idiot interpretation of 56.22, Muslims that die in the struggle (jihad) don’t get virgins (or more technically, an unspecified number of “houri”) but grapes. Now, MD, wouldn’t that piss you off? You leave home, fight and die for Islam and Allah gives you a bunch of grapes. Please tell me this is not true! Tell me they are real, beautiful, hot horis!

  51. @JJ, how cheap u are ….ur last words shows how cheap u are..For ur info, all islamic sites are not created by Muslims in reality but by people like u. Let me know why u accept ur version of Jihad and why not the one I explained?

    So not surprised, there are hatmongers like u who are like Taliban who change meaning of Jihad till the time it means wat u neeed.

  52. Jay,
    It’s useless to talk to people like MD and Abu Sinan. It’s obvious from their comments how much hatred they harbour in their hearts. They are not here for serious debate.

    They pretend as “moderate” Muslims but they have been spewing out hatred against others, so far I haven’t seen them condemning Islamic exremism and suggesting any kind of reform from within.

    Rather they try to deflect a criticism of Islamic extremism by quoting wars from the West which were military and political wars, not waged because someone didn’t follow the religion of the Western countries – that happened in history, it doesn’t happen now I feel they understand this but are not honest enough to acknowledge it.

    Their main job is to deflect criticism away from Islamic extremism and not accepting that there can be a flaw in the activities of he exrtemist Muslims, who should have been expelled from the Umma but they remain in the Umma because of moderate Muslims such as these two.

    Besides, Abu Sinan cites the “pedigree” of his uncivilised wife as an accomplishment – a woman who thinks half the world’s people are not human beings because they don’t follow Islam – she is on a Jihad as brainwashed by Saudi Arabia.

  53. Please….if anyone wants to start debating individuals by name, take it to the debate page!!!!!!!

  54. Some people here want to point at Islam as a violent religion. What Md is saying is right. Hindu terroirists are on the rise. These are Hindu “talibans” but are much worse. They want Christians out of the country and rape the nuns. They think that people in India are bringing in western cultures and that women should be dressed modestly. How Muslims they have burned is really sad.

    Hindus have no right to talk about violence in Islam.

  55. On the contrary – they are in a decline and have been out of power for a decade. Their party is losing support in the society. MD is trying to deflect attention from criticism of Islamic extremism by misrepresenting facts here. He doesn’t want to acknowledge that he Hindu Majority have made a serious decision not to support the right-wing BJP.

    I don’t see this kind of self-criticism in the Islamic Umma.

    And don’t give me the names of a couple of Western converts to show there is self-criticism in Islam.

    Western converts are very few in number and their self-criticism comes from their rational experience in their pre-Islamic days in a democratic environment.

    It has nothing to do with Islam.

    I’m talking about the born Muslims from non-Western countries here who really form the bulk of the Islamic Umma.

  56. @Sarah MD

    In addition to India making a concerted effort to combat Hindu extremism through democratic action and public debate, the issue of Hindu extremism is not on the same scale as Muslim extremism cause Hindus limit their cause to India whereas Muslim extremists seek to export their cause and jihad globally.

    As a Westerner, Muslim jihad concerns me far more than Hindu extremism which, with one or two exceptions, does not get exported outside of India. It causes me even greater concern when I see moderate Muslims, in my own life and online, who are living in the West, defend and deflect any criticism of extremist Islam.

  57. @JJ,

    You are correct. The use of the word Jihad can mean simple struggle. However, the reference in Quran and Hadith are overwhelming in the focus on the fighting aspects. Further, when Muslims speak of the word it is in the context of fighting the enemy more than 99% of the time. MD is just an apologist that uses linguistic and intellectual acrobatics to deflect rather than look at the issues of Islam. Filling pages with cut and paste references on this blog does not change simple facts.

    Further, I see the same tactics here of apologist by sighting wars by other religions as a way to deflect. We all know Christianity had and continues to have aggression issues. Sighting that fact does not change the reality that Islam has aggressive intolerant dogma that needs to be dealt with. Apologist never fail to site arguments like others are bad so why are you picking on us as a defense, instead of addressing the issues.

  58. That’s very interesting. I will read the full article when I find time later today.

    I can only assume that the reason for Mr. Mansour Al-Nogaidan’s turn to extremist islamic groups was due to his guilt about lack of faith?

    I can imagine that it would be quite a struggle to deal with doubts about God while living in a society like Saudi Arabia, where defection from Islam is not acceptable. I guess it kind of shows that some people may flee to less-religious societies to lessen their guilt, while others may turn to extreme groups and ideologies.

    I would like to hope that these signs are being identified by the community as possible precursors to extremism and a careful approach is made towards the people experiencing them so as to not drive them away to these groups that spread such hate in the name of Islam.

  59. @Madelenas

    When it comes to loss of lives and violence, it does not matter if it happens in a room, or one country. Your reasoning seems to be that its okay as long as its not happening in my country.

  60. Moq,
    That’s a very important point you have made – just because it has happened in other religions doesn’t take away the fact that Islam is making this violence global and Muslim are trying to stop any criticism of Islamic extremism.

    There is a criticism possible of Christian, Hindu, Sikh, Jew and other non-religious aggressions, but not of the global Islamic aggression because Muslims don’t allow it, which is the most important point.

  61. Funny how others blast people for calling names, then call names themselves. Ironic how they accuse others of extremism, yet hold extreme positions themselves and cite the works of well known extremists to try and prove their point.

    I guess the only extremists okay with them are the extremist that support their ideology? For these people there is NO SUCH THING as a moderate Muslim. To them Muslims are either two things…………apologist Muslims who are extremists in sheeps clothing, or outright extremists. These people, although they wont usually say it, do not think it is possible for Muslims to be moderate. Hence, their agenda, at the end of the day is about eliminating Islam because they feel it is impossible to reform the religion, impossible for any “true Muslim” to not be violent.

    They hold such extremist views, yet attack others for being extremist. Sad they cannot see it, or maybe they can, and just wont admit it.

    For those who think Islam is unreformable your receipe is for unending conflict. There are one billion Muslims in this world and we are NOT going to give up our religion, not for you, for for anyone. I’d say I am sorry for that, but I am not.

    I completely think that it is entirely possible for Islam and Muslims to be a peaceful and modern religion. It is a process we must go through ourselves. We cannot, nor will not, be forced down any road or any path by outsiders.

    People, like those here, who insist on attacking Islam and Muslims need to realise that their actions are making it harder for those of us trying to make positive changes in our community.

    Islam is here, it is not going away, so you MUST find a way to deal with it. The West does not want, nor can it handle, a hundred years war with a people that greatly outnumber it.

    So either be positive and offer something of value, or get out of the way and stop making it harder for us. Stop giving aid and comfort to extremists out there. People like Robert Spencer,and other anti Muslim radicals, are some of the BEST recruiting agents for the Muslim extremists.

  62. @Daisy,

    What planet are you on? There is global discussion and criticism of things in the Muslim world. If you dont think so you dont read BBC, Deutsche Welle or the thousand or so other papers out there. It is talked about every day, in venues all over the world. I dont know what you are on about. Ever watch CNN or FOX News?

    Your talk about “the Muslims dont allow it” sounds a lot like the old slanders made against the Jews. A lot of the Islamophobic rhetoric out there is VERY similar to the old anti Semitism. Your statement sounds like Muslims control everything, media, all venues of communication, therefore Muslims have a veto over what is talked about.

    Your Islamophobia, taken from well known bigots like Robert Spencer (whom you open cite), is the modern day propaganda that was seen in Nazi Germany before the Holocaust. Already the same sorts are talking in Europe about citizenship tests that would specifically target Muslims, talks about banning The Qur’an and other issues targeted towards Muslims and Islam.

    The “Never Again” said after the Holocaust in Europe needs to be changed to “Once Again” because that is the same road we are going down now.

    Islamophbia/anti-Semitism, two peas from the same pod. Sad how you can take political cartoons from the West today about Muslims and Islam and compare them to anti Jewish cartoons in Germany in the 1940s and they are almost exactly alike. Change the word “Jew” to “Muslim” and they are a match.

    Europe is marching down the same path of genocide it did back in the 1920s and 1930s. Lets hope more people start to see it and do something about it before it happens again!

  63. @Daisy,

    BTW, if you dont think the religious wars within Christiandom were a global thing you need to hit the history books. The struggles played out fron Africa, the Middle East, Asia and the New World. There isnt a thing happening within and without the Muslim world today that didnt happen before.

    This isnt to excuse anything, as some have suggested, rather to keep things in perspective. After all, if we do not know where we and others came from, we wont know where to go.

  64. @MoQ,
    Does Islam have an aggressive and intollerant dogma or is that the way it is now interpreted? Verses which were addressing a specific time and state of war exist but does that mean that they themselves are to blame if people later misuse them?

    Should the Quran not at all have mentioned war if in fact Muslims were involved in battle? Islam does mention war because it is part of the history of the prophet. That does not mean that it should continue to be part of life for all Muslims in future. Similarly, the propoganda of war in WW2 for example should not be used nowadays as it is time specific but any account of British history would mention this event. Most fair minded individuals would realise that it is an account of history and not a guide for current living.

    It seems that what people actually require of ‘moderate’ Muslims is not that they denounce the terrorists but in fact that they should denounce Islam. I love my religion and value it highly and will openly speak out against those who misinterpret it. However, because others abuse the wording does not mean I am required to denounce the text itself.

    I agree that you will find Jihad in the content of war in the Quran but that is because it is discussing the events of the time. Is this to be denounced as wrong? Should the facts have been ignored or removed regarding the wars of the prophet? If they had then the same people complaining here would have accused Muslims of covering the truth.

    And the overriding message of the Quran against disbelievers is ‘leave them to their own devices, their judgement lies with God.’ or, try to tell them the truth but if they do not accept it, then let them persue that course if they choose. Action is only taken by the prophet against those who were actively persuing a violent course against him, at that time.

    By the way, as a subnote, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad over 100 years ago claimed that the time of Jihad with the sword is over and that now is Jihad with the pen. So when it is said that no Muslims take a stand against violent Jihad that is not true. Of course, most people nowadays do not consider us ‘within the Ummah’ so that is the reaction peace lovers recieved.

  65. Abu Sinan,
    So far you have shown no sign of how moderation can be brought in Islam and how extremism can be killed.

    Islamic extremism hurts the non-Muslims, so we are not going to “get out of the way”. We are only trying to reason wit you.

    You keep on saiyng that there is moderation possible, that the Muslims will change themselves from within, but where is the evidence?

    Again, I’m talking about the born Muslims from the non-Western countries who form the bulk of the Umma. Don’t cite the name of Carol etc. I have explained that above.

    I’m the person who has endlessly argued on blogs that Indian Muslims are different, they are moderate and they know how to live with other religions. Jay and Oby know about it. So do several others who frequent these blogs.

    But after that, if I come across Indian Muslims who suddenly change their colours when they are outside the Indian environment, what am I supposed to make out of it?

    It’s only their change of attitude which has made it more and more difficult for me to hold on to my previous view. I am now beginning to doubt them.

  66. Moq,
    Perhaps you were right that Indian Muslims follow the Makka section in India and Medina section when they are in a global environment and in the majority.

  67. @Daisy,

    There is evidence EVERYWHERE that Muslims are coming out to do what they can against the extremists. Of course you wont see that when you read bigots like Robert Spencer. He is convinced, as are those who follow him, that it is impossible to reform Islam or to have a Muslim world that is peaceable because he feels that Islam is defective at it’s core.

    Although he wont say it, the conclusion is obvious. If it is impossible to have a peaceful Islam then there are only two options. Either Muslims drop Islam or the West must wage a war of extermination against Muslims.

    Your citing Robert Spencer is like me citing Sayyid Qutb. With that reference you have outed yourself completely. No one who reads and believes Robert Spencer is interested in peace with the Islamic world, because they dont believe it is possible.

    Quoting Robert Spencer, in regards to Islam and Muslims, is like someone quoting Goebbels about Jews and Judaism.

  68. @Sara,

    “Does Islam have an aggressive and intolerant dogma or is that the way it is now interpreted? ”

    The answer is: It was designed that way from the start. It is a dogma started by a warlord. Read your books it is not the interpretation. The violent words and haltered against others are all over the book. You cannot read a page in Quran without encountering negativity about others (ex. fight them, they will burn in hell, stone them,calling others pigs and monkey’s etc.) Try it for once as an experiment and see how many of these negative verses are there.

    ” Verses which were addressing a specific time and state of war exist but does that mean that they themselves are to blame if people later misuse them?”

    So is Islam for all people and all times? If not then what is the universal method for identifying what part of the book are meant for then versus now? Wouldn’t picking and choosing make the religion unnecessary, because you can certainly come up with a new set of rules, since you are picking based on what you think applies?

    “I agree that you will find Jihad in the content of war in the Quran but that is because it is discussing the events of the time. Is this to be denounced as wrong? Should the facts have been ignored or removed regarding the wars of the prophet?”

    No we should not disregard the wars of the prophet. Quite the opposite, I am recognize them. My point is why is a person who spent most of his time fighting others be worthy of emulating. This is the central issue with Islam, the emulation of a person that chose violence as a mean to gain power.

  69. Abu Sinan,
    I’m not quoting Robert Spencer. This is my personal journey with Muslims.

    I have seen the most moderate face of Islam in India, which people in the West have not seen. I have innumerable Muslim friends in India who are very, very moderate and democratic. That’s why I have argued endlessly with people on blogs that moderation is possible in Islam – it has existed in Indian Islam for centuries.

    But when Indian Muslims come out of the Indian environment to these blogs, become a part of the majority, they too begin to talk like the extremists. This has raised serious doubts in my mind about what they are in India and what they might become outside India if Islam becomes all pervasive.

    I have never read Robert Spencer seriously. I have read only the book I cited above and that book is quite sensible. His other writings may not be acceptable even to me. I told you this before.

    As a matter of fact, I have read Sayyid Qutb and others like him and have even written a critique of them. This paper has gone for publication.

    The way to read any book is to read it with an open mind, not blindly accepting whatever the book says. There are always some positive and some negative ideas in every book. We should look critically at the book and decide what we want to accept and what we don’t want to accept. That’s why I said one should read all these books with an open mind. All of them say many things that are very reasonable and some which are not acceptable. That’s for the person to decide after s/he has read the book and thought about it.

  70. @Daisy,
    Are you saying that india is the only place where moderate Muslims can exist and that india is the hope for Islam?

    @MoQ,
    So is Islam for all people and all times? If not then what is the universal method for identifying what part of the book are meant for then versus now?

    Islam is meant for all time but does that mean that historical narrative is not allowed? How could you identify which verses are meant for then versus now? – By using intelligence and thinking about it. It is pretty clear if the verses are talking about a specific time (one that day, on the day when, when some of you, etc) It is not difficult to understand what is narrative and what is a ruling.

    As for mentioning hell and fire, this is the role of all religions, to warn against sin and invite to good. It comes down to if you believe in these concepts and fundamentally if you believe in the afterlife. Aren’t these verses just a warning and aren’t they followed by ‘but if you repent then you will be forgiven’? Isn’t it addressing human nature to offer inscentives and punnishments? Doesn’t a mother also use the same system (although with different terminology) when training her children?

    The prophet Muhammad did not spend ‘most of his time’ in war, far from it. For 13 years he lived in Mecca and he and his followers suffered for their faith. They were physically abused and ostracised from society. As a result of the deprivations suffered in Mecca his beloved wife and uncle died. What was the reaction of the prophet during this time? Did he wage war then, did he react with violence against the violence he recieved. No, he migrated to Medina.

    You also said that the prophet chose violence as a mean to gain power.

    When he entered Medina was it as a conqueror? Did he wage a war to become the leader there? No, he was invited and appointed by the residents. Even the Jews of Medina agreed to his becoming the leader of Medina because of his good conduct.

    So when you say he spent most of his time in war this is a msirepresentation of the facts. Yes, there were wars, but war was not and is not now the basis of Islam. When he conquered Mecca how many days of battle were there before he entered the city? Oh, none, the Meccans surrendered and all except about a dozen people were given a general amnesty and forgiven their sins. Of these only 4 were killed because their crimes were so grave. Taking such action is common to all wars. The Nuremburg trials for example? Saddam Hussein’s trial? Why is it so demonic if Islam has done a similar thing?

    So it is actually you who have taken part of history and ignored the rest. Yes war ocurred but so did mercy, forgiveness and peace. Is it right of you to focus only on one aspect of Islam and ignore the good therein? Doesn’t that make you exactly the same as the very extremists you dislike?

  71. Sara,
    Perhaps yes – in terms of the way they practise Islam in India, it’s perhaps the best face of Islam in the world.

    But as I said, I’m beginning to have doubts now, about how they may behave if Islam becomes all pervasive.

  72. @Sara,

    “The prophet Muhammad did not spend ‘most of his time’ in war, far from it. For 13 years he lived in Mecca and he and his followers suffered for their faith.”

    The prophet did not have power in Meccca for those 13 years, hence he had to live in peace. Actually Meccan’s tolerated him for all these 13 years without harming him, even though he preached against their religion. Your comment that he was prosecuted does not pass the logic test. 13 years is a long time. In all these 13 years not 1 Muslim was killed. Mecca was a center of religion and many gods were accepted. Mohammad’s God would have been accepted, if he accepted the gods of others. All the fighting started is when the Prophet got strong and started fighting. As soon as he had some power, the peaceful nature of living in peace with others disappeared.

    “When he conquered Mecca how many days of battle were there before he entered the city? Oh, none,”

    So you are saying it is not an act of aggression, if someone surrenders because you surrounded their city with a strong force. Check your logic please….

    Look at the history of the prophet and his followers. Fighting never stopped as soon as they had power in madina. You are denying history, even the one written by Muslims.

  73. @Sara,

    “Doesn’t that make you exactly the same as the very extremists you dislike?”

    By teh way. I did not call anyone here an extremist. Neither did I deny any piece of history. I just happen to think you have to divide the time of teh prophet into 2 periods. Meccan and Madina period. Each period has it’s own unique behavior. In Madina the prophet had power. The test of a peaceful person is whether he will be aggressive when having power. That test is not valid when a person is not capable of fighting. The prophet does not pass that test in my opinion.

    My point again is, Islam has a central issue of emulating a prophet that was not peaceful. Until that is recognized you will not be able to reform the religion in any serious way.

  74. “Actually Meccan’s tolerated him for all these 13 years without harming him, even though he preached against their religion”

    Really? The companions were tortured daily. They were (poor, weak and slaves) severly tortured and even total ban for three years with no businesses, food or drink. The stronger muslims were in house arrest. The Prophet himself was publicly ridiculed and humiliated with people throwing filth on him in the street and while he prayed. The Muslims did not fight back their persecutors as there was no revaltion to do so. Finally when it was unbearable, some Muslims migrated to Abyssinia. Why will they migrate if there was peace. Don’t tell us that they did not harm the Muslims.

  75. @Nas,

    I am always amazed how little you know on every topic.

    The idea that Muslims were tortured relates to the story of Billal, who was a slave. Meccan’s were slavers. Slaves were beaten if they disobeyed their masters. I am not justifying slavery or torture of slaves, but extending the torture of slaves into torture of Muslims is bad logic.

    The prophet was never prosecuted in Mecca until he wrote a treaty with the tribes of Yuthrobe. That was considered a war pact against his own city and he was targeted for death before his escape.

    Regarding Muslim property were stolen: that is another story that does not pass the logic test. As you recall of you read Islamic text, Ali remained in Mecca for 3 days after the prophet left to settle business transaction. How about Abu Baker being one of the richest merchants in Mecca. The prophet himself was trading under his wife’s business. She was also a Muslim. You cannot say Muslims were stopped from having businesses and earning a living when you have such examples.

    The fact is Muslims were poor, because the prophet attracted the poor and less fortunate in those days.

  76. What I wrote are historical facts and just because you want to show how violent Muslims are, you try to show your “knowledge” by brushing aside real facts. The total ban is well know where the Prophet’s tribe suffered for 3 long years. Abu Bakr was a poor Muslim who was drawn to Islam(!)

    I know how much “knowledgeable” you are. In any debate you do not belittle the others and take it personally. But then that is what you do – always. You do not pass your own logic test.

  77. @Nas,

    “where the Prophet’s tribe suffered for 3 long years.”

    The prophet’s tribe is Quraish. Most people from Mecca were from that tribe, including the none Muslims that are supposed to have put a pan on themselves according to you :)

    “I know how much “knowledgeable” you are. In any debate you do not belittle the others and take it personally. But then that is what you do”

    You give yourself too much credit. I never take anything on a blog comment personally. The issue as always, that you argue every topic even if your knowledge base is weak. I am selective in what I debate and I always insure that I have knowledge in the area. Perhaps, if you try to select arguing on topics that you are knowledgeable about, you won’t feel so belittled (as you say).

    Regarding me painting Islam as violent in the early days. I am pointing the facts. They are very clear. The prophet fought with everyone as he got stronger. His followers took the banner after his death and extended teh fight Northward. You cannot erase history.

  78. Daisy, on July 17, 2010 at 8:28 am Said:

    On the contrary – they are in a decline and have been out of power for a decade. Their party is losing support in the society. MD is trying to deflect attention from criticism of Islamic extremism by misrepresenting facts here. He doesn’t want to acknowledge that he Hindu Majority have made a serious decision not to support the right-wing BJP.

    I don’t see this kind of self-criticism in the Islamic Umma.

    ——————————————————————-

    Again posting here what Muslim Ummah and Ulema has been doing against extremism and terrorists. I thought u are half knowledged but still giving links for Muslim’s endless fatwa agaisnt terrorsim,Ur hatred is forcing u to ignore my proof.

    Let me open ur hatred brain again:

    Muslims stand against terrorism:

    http://www.google.com.sg/search?q=Fatwa+agaisnt+terrorism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

    Let me know if u can count.

    And what Hindus have done to abolish HIndu terrorism?
    Their effor is to legalise Hindu terrorists? Why HIndu terrorists are not banned in a land of 900 million Hindus?
    Have any religious Hindu group condemend Hindu terroirsts like RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal for bombing in Masjid and for raping/burnign HIndus and chrisitans like Muslim ummah have been doing (as shown in link)?

    What u say non-Muslims wage war for political reason not for relgion??

    Haha u are perfect example of high class hypocrite HIndus. When Hindu terrorists rape pregrant Muslim women and slit her womb, they chant “Jai Sri Ram”, why they burn kill christians and Muslims, they starts with “Jai Sri Ram”. Even small babys are not spared by Hindu terrorists.

    Let me open ur hypocrite eyes:

    =======================================

    here is the conversation of Hindu terrorist bombers who bomb for religion:

    excerpt from the story,

    Dalvi: There should be blasts across India. People should die in lakhs and crores. Only then will they (Muslims) panic and come on our side.
    Pandey: This will create pressure and they will convert on their own.
    Dalvi: Yes.
    Pandey: Once the conversion begins, it will not take long for the entire country to get converted (to Hinduism).
    Sharma: They will return (to Hinduism) just the way they went away.
    Pandey: You are right.

    http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/105546/120/saffron-brigades-terror-plots-exposed.html

    What u say?? Isnt it religious one?

  79. Regarding the persecuting nature of the pre-Islamic tribes of Makka – Muhammad received unconditional protection of his uncle despite his preachings against the religion of pre-Islamic Arabia. His uncle never converted to Islam, but he supported Muhammad as long as he was alive.

    I wonder if Muhammad would have given unconditional support to his opponent in religion for his lifetime.

    This was the same uncle, for whom Muhammad refused to ask for blessings from Allah in his prayers, on the pretext that this uncle had never accepted Islam, so he could not pray for him. So much for the gratitude Muhammad felt for his uncle who supported him in his worst times.

    Regarding the poor followers of Muhammad in Makka – Khadija was a rich woman and Muhammad used her wealth to convert the slaves, the prisoners and the poor people to increase his following. That’s how many followers of Muhammad in Makka were poor.

    Once Khadija’s wealth finished, both Muhammad and Khadija fell on bad times. It was not the fault of the pre-Islamic Makkans, but the fault of Muhammas himself, who instead of multiplying Khadija’s wealth, spent it all on the cause of his own advancement in becoming a leader of Arab tribes.

    In the beginning Muhammad did manage Khadija’s business, but that was before he became a prophet. That was the period when he was still following his traditional religion. Hence, the emphasis on Muhammad being an honest manager of Khadija’s wealth is also not an example of his character as a Prophet, but of his character as a trader before he got involved in the business of religion.

  80. ==========================================
    RELIGIOUS HINDU TERRORISM IN INDIA IN 21ST CENTURY

    WARNING!!!

    NOT FOR WEAK HEART. :

    Hindus call women “God – MAA/Bhagwan/Laxmi” but same People from hate mongering terrorsits chanted “JAI SRI RAM”, raped pregant women repeatdly in line, then cut their breasts, cut the womb, thrashed the emberyo, then put salt on her blood oozing body, pour petrol and burnt. This is the respects of a women? And this is taught in their so called terrorists institutions?. But, unfortunatley they are legal in our biggest democratic and secular country. .India

    IF U HAVE BIG HEART TRY TO SEE THESE PICTURES:

    1. http://indianterrorism.150m.com/gujarat%20pictures%201.htm
    2. http://indianterrorism.150m.com/gujarat%20pictures%202.htm
    3. http://indianterrorism.150m.com/gujarat%20pictures%203.htm
    4. http://indianterrorism.150m.com/gujarat%20pictures%204.htm
    5. http://indianterrorism.150m.com/gujarat%20pictures%205.htm

    6. http://indianterrorism.150m.com/gujarat%20pictures%206.htm
    7. http://indianterrorism.150m.com/gujarat%20pictures%207.htm
    8. http://indianterrorism.150m.com/gujarat%20pictures%208.htm
    9. http://indianterrorism.150m.com/gujarat%20pictures%209.htm
    10. http://www.worldpress.org/Asia/565.cfm
    11. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1881497.stm

    See millions of Hindu terrorist supporters and asking to kill Muslims in public forum with loud speakers;

    So u hypocrite says there is only Muslim religous extremist and bombers in world? Let me know if u want more proof of Hindu terrorist’s bombing in Masjids. Also note that I have capability to condemn Muslim terrororsts be it Taliban or Al-Qaida, still u are blaming me when u never condemn Hindu terrorrst bombers, rapists. Still u will say u are not hypocrite?

  81. @Daisy,

    U said “Prophet Muhammad wanted to be a leader of tribe”. If he wanted fame, leadership, he would have promoted his photos, paintings, statue so that millions of people in all over world rember him and keep his statue at home like HIndu God Lord Ram did.

    Haha u also says, Prophet Muhammad was not example of Prophet? Muhammad was a human being, lets talk abt God. What abt ur God Ram? He could not even protect his wife Sita. When devil Ravan took away his wife, a God could not save his wife? Devil stronger than God? And see the greatness of God Ram:

    Famous story of Ram and Seeta and AGNI PAREKSHA

    In hindu scriptures, when Ravan Kidnapped Sita (Wife of Ram) Ram was not able to find his wife, imagine so called god dont knwo where is his wife … anyways then Hanuman(west says Monkey GOd) helped him to find Sita, and after a war when he released his wife he asked her to take AGNI PARIKSHA, which means TEST OF FIRE, she had to walk through the fire if she burnt its mean she was abused by RAVAN and then Ram will not take her back but if she could tolerate the burn then she is pure and acceptable for RAWAN,

    A God cant trust his wife? And he is expmple of being GOD?

  82. @MD,
    I don’t think you are addressing the correct issue. Thee Quran clearly states that there is no need to abuse the gods of others lest they abuse your God. You can answer any point Daisy has about Islam but I really don’t think trying to defame her religion is the right way to do it.

    The issue of the post is Islamic extremists, not Hindu doctrine.

  83. When hate filled people like Daisy says Prophet Muhammad SAW was not an example of prophet, it doesnt hold water.
    Reality cant be changed by hatred propaganda. Millions of non Muslims are converting to Islam day by day for the love of Islam. There are 3 types of people who malign Islam, terrorists like taliban, biased media, hate monger non-Muslims.

    I will be wrong if I miss to mention million other peace loving just non-Muslims. Lets see wat intellectual non_muslim says abt Muhammad SAW:

    ==========================
    Muhammad: The Most influential single figure: American Author..

    Have a look why Mumahmmad SAW was chosen as most influtial figure..here he mentioned abt Mahatama Gandhi (who is time and again insulted by Hindu terorrists).also..

  84. @Sarah,

    Since century, Muslims in all over world have been replying intolerable questions of non-Muslims with noble effort to make them understand Islam IN CONTEXT. See how dare they are to say our Prophet SAW was not example of true prophet? Do u think they have little respect for other relgion? See how they stick to wrong version of Islam and completely ignore contextual peaceful Islam. If they discussed both good/peaceful and violent verses of Islam, I would have been happy. when a Muslim try to explain Quran in context they say moderate Muslims support terrorists, so they mean that Muslim should accept that Islam is wrong, Muhammad SAW was wrong, Quran is wrong? Is it sign of tolerance?

    It was my ultimate effort to open eyes of people. And first time in life to ask questions on other relgion.

    Thank God Muslims are so tolerant. In all over world, Muslims dnt mock other faith by misinterpreting their relgious books, faith. What Muslims do is to reply their questions. When u reply their questions, they say Muslims are extremists and dnt think what they are doing. Imagine if Muslims do opposite? Asking/mocking other faith in Internet world?

  85. @MD,

    Wasn’t it a point that someone made earlier in the thread that your religion should make you a better person?

    That means that even in the face of abuse you refrain from giving abuse in return. It does not reflect well on anyone to be abusive and it doesn’t mean you love Islam less if you try to debate with rational argument and not abuse.

  86. @Sarah, I agree with u. THis is what Islam says -
    Allah says in the Glorious Qur’an, Surah Nahl, Ch.16, v:125,
    “Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious”

    But I lost patience when she constantly ignore our peaceful reply try to force us with her version of Islam. U know its not possible to awake some1 who is not sleeping.

    In between, we Muslims accept any kind of questions from non-Muslims, why cant they accept our questions and reply us? Why it should be considered abuse?

  87. When I was talking about the Prophet’s tribe, I was referring to the clan of Banu Hashim.

    I also do not talk on any subject and I do comment when I see some people try to show false facts to suit their thinking.

    It is true that when Islam started, it was spread in secrecy. That was of course necessary. How would anyone start overnight fighting. It was a slow process. I do not see anything unusual in this.

    Sarah has pointed out the tortures meted out to the new muslims in Makkah. (It’s in debate page).

  88. If the Prophet wanted fame or money, he would have taken it when it was offered.

    But what did he say, he said : I swear by Almighty God that even if they put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left, and in return, demand of me to quit the propagation of Islam and follow of my divine aim, I will never do what they want me to. ‘

    “Regarding the poor followers of Muhammad in Makka – Khadija was a rich woman and Muhammad used her wealth to convert the slaves, the prisoners and the poor people to increase his following.”

    I would be interested to see any references to this.

  89. Narrated ‘Aisha (Radi-Allahu ‘anha):

    That she asked the Prophet (Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam), ‘Have you encountered a day harder than the day of the battle) of Uhud?” The Prophet (Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam) replied, “Your tribes have troubled me a lot, and the worse trouble was the trouble on the day of ‘Aqaba when I
    presented myself to Ibn ‘Abd-Yalail bin ‘Abd-Kulal and he did not respond to my demand. So I departed, overwhelmed with excessive sorrow, and proceeded on, and could not relax till I found myself at Qarnath-Tha-alib
    where I lifted my head towards the sky to see a cloud shading me unexpectedly. I looked up and saw Gabriel (‘Alaihis-Salam) in it. He called me saying, ‘Allah has heard your people’s saying to you, and what they have replied back to you, Allah has sent the Angel of the Mountains to you so that you may order him to do whatever you wish to these people.’ The Angel of the Mountains called and greeted me, and then said, “O Muhammd O Muhammad! Order what you wish. If you like, I will let Al-Akh-Shabain (i.e. two mountains) fall on them.” The Prophet (Sallallahu ‘Alaihi Wa Sallam) said, “No but I hope that Allah will let them beget children who will worship Allah Alone, and will worship None besides Him.”

    Bukhari Vol. 4 : No. 454

  90. On Islamic fundamentalism and its outcomes.

    Everyone must read this. I wish more people thought like him –

    http://www.energypublisher.com/article.asp?id=36606

  91. Daisy…

    To be fair to your fellow country men and all of the other Muslims in the world who do not support extremism, do not let Md. Azad Ali Shah be the face of Islam in India. His opinion is his own and I don’t think it is fair to say all Indian Muslims or other Muslims who chose peaceful coexistance can be like Md.

  92. @oby,

    Exactly, I also dnt think Daisy represents Hindus. In between, I dnt think I have talked anything bad agaisnt any1 or any relgion except truth that I can prove with evidence. I didnt say anything more. I stand for justice.

  93. Its amazing people think I support Muslim extremism/terrorsts even when I constantly speak against Taliban/Al-Qaida jsut becoz I dnt accept their version of Islam. I have to follow Islam as per interpretation of Islam haters not as per ISLAM in IN CONTEXT?

  94. Md…

    I did not mean to indicate that you support extremism and if I came off that way please excuse…I do know that you have talked against the Taliban…I was just trying to say that NO ONE should paint everyone with a wide brush. Not all Indian Muslims are extremist and not all Hindus are extremists. It is obvious both of you are strong in your stances but I think both of you are being a bit sweeping in your viewpoints.

  95. Md…

    “Since century, Muslims in all over world have been replying intolerable questions of non-Muslims with noble effort to make them understand Islam IN CONTEXT. See how dare they are to say our Prophet SAW was not example of true prophet? Do u think they have little respect for other relgion? See how they stick to wrong version of Islam and completely ignore contextual peaceful Islam. If they discussed both good/peaceful and violent verses of Islam, I would have been happy.”

    After reading all these explanations the thing I thought was it all depends on what side of the fence one is on. A Muslim will see them in one context (self defense let’s say) and a non Muslim will see them in another context. (war creating) THE EXACT SAME VERSES AND WORDS will be viewed differently depending which lense is used to view it.

    From my viewpoint, one can’t change history. All fighters in any battle will feel as if they were justified in that battle. From the beginning of time to now. They MUST feel that way as they have so much invested in the battle whether they won or lost (and I am not only talking about islam here). AND depending on who you ask they will have their own versions of the story and how it transpired complete with heroic details even (and maybe most especially) if they lost. that is the nature of people. For me the question is do we live with past history and are we destined to make that history our current reality? Personally, if Muslims recognize the violent verses in their holy books and yet are willing to relegate that to the annals of history and not apply it to today (which is what I think you are trying to say) I think that is enough to ask of them. We can’t change all the violent Christian history or other religious history. But it should not be perpetuated today in the name of God. If Muslims do that and make that their aim and goal then I think that is enough to ask of them.

  96. “But it should not be perpetuated today in the name of God. If Muslims do that and make that their aim and goal then I think that is enough to ask of them.”

    ——————————————-
    Dear Oby,

    I respectfully agree wat u say. This is how Taliban does by justifying the fact that other innocents are killed by non-Muslims in many parts of world. Similarly Islamophobic or hater non-Muslim go in line with Taliban by forcing theri version of interpretation of Islam.

    Both both groups forcefully and adamantly ignore the fact that God/Allah doesnt allow to harm SINGLE INNOCENT. DO u think that when they are sincere and see following verses form Quran, they will argue? Do u think that they dnt know following verses? Exactly they know but ignore to acknowldege due to their hatred in heart. When hatred rules heart, mind, brain, they see only 1 side.They constantly reject peaceful verses from Quran and bring war field verses on normal, daily life.They think we dont know their intentions:

    a) “If anyone slew a person—unless it be for murder or spreading mischief in the land—it would be as if he slew the whole people. And if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.”(5:32)

    b) “Do not kill women or children or non-combatants and do not kill old people or religious people,” and he mentioned priests, nuns and rabbis. And he said, “Do
    not cut down fruit-bearing trees and do not poison the wells of your enemies.”

  97. =============================================
    ISLAM ALLOWS ONLY SELF DEFENCE – FIGHT THOSE WHO FIGHT U.

    MESSAGE FROM PROPHET MUHAMMAD ON KILLING INNOCENTS, WOMEN:

    http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=53415

    =========================================

  98. ============================================

    Human Rights in Islam:

    http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/M_hri/index.htm

    ==============================================

  99. @Oby, point is as u said, what lense a person wants to use. As u said, we can ignore history. We Muslims ignore today’s incident also ( 17 July 2010) –

    (Hindu terrorist tried to kill Muslim vice president of India in the name of God.

    http://www.twocircles.net/2010jul17/how_rss_and_other_sangh_parivar_outfits_escape_terrorist_tag.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+Twocirclesnet-IndianMuslim+%28TwoCircles.net+-+Indian+Muslim+News%29
    )

    We dnt bring those verses from Hinduism’s or other relgion’s holy books which says like – suicide bombers will go to swarg (heaven) and will get Apsara (virgin girl) in heaven. We Muslims also dnt say that some prophet or God of other relgion doesnt reflect good example. So, it doesnt mean that Muslims dont know to quote verses from other religions and justify terrorism but reality is we dnt like to do that and so dnt do. But we only reply but still call extremist supporters, haters. We can imagine if we Muslims do opposite like them.

  100. MD Azad,
    You know nothing about me and I haven’ t even discussed much with you. So there is no need for you to comment about what kind of a person I am.

    Oby,
    I am quite sure MD Azad doesn’t show his true colours in front of his Hindu friends he claims to have. I am quite sure he pretends as a moderate Muslim respecting of others’ religions in front of them.

    This makes me wonder – does this mean that all those Muslim friends I have are also pretending in front of me? Will they also behave like MD Azad in a global environment?

    This is quite a scary thought for me.

  101. More on Jihad as the eternal war against the non-Muslims until all people are converted to Islam and on the use of deceit as legitimate command of Allah to carry on the Jihad.

    So, a “moderate” Muslim may be cursing the non-Muslim all the time in his heart – this is part of Jihad –

    Quotes –

    “Deception of the enemy during war is only common sense. The crucial difference in Islam, however, is that war against the infidel is a perpetual affair…”

    “The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily.”…

    “In the Muslim community, jihad is a religious duty because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the jihad was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense. But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.”…

    …”the expansionist jihad is seen as an altruistic endeavor, not unlike the nineteenth century ideology of “the white man’s burden.” The logic is that the world, whether under democracy, socialism, communism, or any other system of governance, is inevitably living in bondage—a great sin, since the good of all humanity is found in living in accordance to God’s law. In this context, Muslim deception can be viewed as a slightly less than noble means to a glorious end—Islamic hegemony under Shari’a rule, which is seen as good for both Muslims and non-Muslims.”…

    …in March 2009—Saudi legal expert Basem Alem publicly echoed this view:

    “As a member of the true religion, I have a greater right to invade [others] in order to impose a certain way of life [according to Shari'a], which history has proven to be the best and most just of all civilizations. This is the true meaning of offensive jihad.”…

    Do read the entire article here –

    http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war

  102. Quote –
    “When a group of prominent Muslims wrote an open letter to the American people soon after the strikes of 9/11, saying that Islam seeks to peacefully coexist,[44] bin Laden wrote to castigate them:

    As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High’s Word: “We [Muslims] renounce you [non-Muslims]. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us—till you believe in God alone” [Qur'an 60:4]. So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility—that is, battle—ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [i.e., a dhimmi, or protected minority], or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy! … Such then is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred—directed from the Muslim to the infidel—is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them.[45]

    Mainstream Islam’s four schools of jurisprudence lend their support to this hostile Weltanschauung by speaking of the infidel in similar terms. Bin Laden’s addresses to the West with his talk of justice and peace are clear instances of taqiyya. He is not only waging a physical jihad but a propaganda war, that is, a war of deceit.”

    Do read the entire article here –

    http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war

  103. Quote again from the article linked above –

    …”Yet most Westerners continue to think that Muslim mores, laws, and ethical constraints are near identical to those of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Naively or arrogantly, today’s multiculturalist leaders project their own worldview onto Islamists, thinking a handshake and smiles across a cup of coffee, as well as numerous concessions, are enough to dismantle the power of God’s word and centuries of unchanging tradition. The fact remains: Right and wrong in Islam have little to do with universal standards but only with what Islam itself teaches—much of which is antithetical to Western norms.”…

  104. Some of the things you quote are a bit concerning if they are true. What would bother me more is if Muslims found it to be true and felt like the needed to act on it.

    I will read the articles….but I have to ask…is it just possible that maybe not all Muslims have this in their heart and are ordinary average people, with ordinary average lives and ordinary average obligations like kids, in laws and bills and are simply living their lives like everyone else?

  105. Oby,
    I do hope you are right.

    But I’m at a juncture of life where I’m beginning to wonder if all their “respect for others’ religions” is really true or if it’s a deceptive technique of Taqqyyia which is derived directly from the Quran -

    (3:28: “If you [Muslims] are under their [infidels'] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them, with your tongue, while harboring inner animosity for them. …” )

    I used to think like you till recently. But perhaps it’s better to be cautious than sorry. It’s high time the democratic world understands this.

  106. @Nas,

    “When I was talking about the Prophet’s tribe, I was referring to the clan of Banu Hashim.”

    Please try again. So even if I accept that you meant Banu Hashim (his clan not his tribe by the way), a little bit of analysis will show that you do not have your facts straight again. The prophet had a total of 7 uncles. 5 of them did not embrace Islam. To simplify this for you, 5 high ranking members of his clan were not Muslims. This includes Abdul Uzza ibn Abdul Muttalib (known to you as Abu Lahab, a strong enemy of Mohamad). So in essence, you are saying that the members of the clan were boycotting themselves.

  107. @Ali Shah,

    You write a lot and say very little. Most of what you write is the cherry picking of peaceful verses of Islam which were part of the period when the prophet was not strong during the Mecca period. Not putting these verses in that context is disingenuous and make your arguments weak. The Prophet and the text has to be looked at from the angle of the actions of the prophet and the text he forwarded during his period of strength (Madina period0. When he had the opportunity to wage war, he did not chose the path of peaceful co-existence and the text got increasingly violent.

    Islam had centuries of wars, forceful conversions, and enslavement of others. The Quran is also full of violent references. For you to say that Islam is peaceful and the Quran is a book of peace means you are discarding history and possibly cannot comprehend what you read in the religious text.

    I do not see any evidence that you are an extremis. However, until you and other peaceful Muslims come to terms with these issues and understand how your religion can be used by extremist, you will not have a chance of reforming it. Stop with the constant defending and start looking at the real issues of Islam. Throwing around accusations at other religions is not a method of someone who is genuinely interested in reforming the religion, it is a strategy of deflecting blame.

  108. Quraish had tried many things to put a stop to the Prophet’s teachings but nothing they did helped; They then tried the direct approach. Abu Talib, the uncle and head of Banu Hashim, was asked to speak to the Prophet which he did. But Muhammad did not desist. So then they asked Abu Talib to withdraw his protection over the prophet. When Abu Talib told this to his nephew, he said that was okay with him if he wanted to remove his support but the uncle did not want to do this. After all, the Prophet was family and families had very close bonds. Abu Talib informed Quraish that he was not ready to remove his protection.

    So finally frustrated and desparate, the Quraish chose to boycott Banu Hashim. They made an agreement with all sections of the Quraish. This agreement said that no one will marry into Banu Hashim clan nor make any business deals with them. Banu Hashim did not sign this document. So this clan was isolated from the rest for 3 years.

    “So in essence, you are saying that the members of the clan were boycotting themselves.”

    Abu Lahab and his wife, even though they were Banu Hashimites, did not join the other members and those who were not muslims took the side of the prophet because of their family loyalites. So it is clear that out of the strong bond, memebers of Banu Hashim flocked together in the time of crisis and the enemey members stayed away.

    Abu Talib said “Did you not know that we have found Muhammad a prophet like Moses described in the oldest books”. When the boycott ended, the agreement was torn. Abu Talib said “The deed was torn up, and all that was against God’s wish was destroyed”.

  109. @Oby,

    I do not know on what authority Daisy claims to speak for all Muslims and claims to know what is in our hearts. Apparently, according to her, even if we say one thing, we are thinking another. Sorry, but I believe only God has this capacity to understand people’s inner thoughts. Her computer must be quite something if she can deduce such things through it from a variety of people around the world.

    There are crackpots around the world. I can go and get some quotes from them but can I say that they represent all of Islam? Justice dictates that there words should not put in my mouth without my consent. Clearly many of us do not agree with them. These suspicions Daisy harbours only reflect her own prejudices and not actual truth.

    @MoQ,

    It was well known that the Meccans had vowed to kill the prophet. Even on the day he left Mecca a delegation was coming to his house to kill him. He passed them in the street and they failed to recognise him. They then chased him to Thaur and saught to kill him as he fled.

    The prophet arrived in Medina and made a treaty of peace with all the tribes of medina and bonded them in common ‘nationality’ where they agreed to support each other and stand together to protect Medina from any attack. When in Medina he began to establish the mechanism of state including improved sanitation, care for the orphans and he established the bond between Medina and Meccan Muslims.

    However, the Quraish had made several vocal claims that they would kill him and wipe out Islam and began preparations for war. The prophet had a guard at his door in Medina due to these threats. Did the Prophet march on Mecca at that time? How close was the first battle to Medina – oh, very close.

    ‘When he had the opportunity to wage war, he did not chose the path of peaceful co-existence and the text got increasingly violent. ‘ – This is also not true. The Quraish were the one’s to threaten war and to make preparations for it.

    What was the first battle? Oh, 313 poorly equiped and mostly untrained volunteers rode out to face an army of over 1000 highly trained and well equipt fighters from Mecca. Was this Meccan army just passing by? No, they had come towards Medina to carry out their threat.

    All of these events are described in the Quran as they demonstrate how the faithful were able to overcome the odds against them with God’s help. Historicla narrative is a legitimate form of recordning religious history and it does not take a genius to understand what is narrative and what is an instruction.

    So while any view of the history of Islam includes war, it is disingenuous of you or anyone else to claim that this is all Islam teaches. To focus only on war, whether Muslims or not, is to ignore the many good things Islam has also promoted. And yes, members of the prophets family who were not Muslim were included in the boycot.

  110. Sarah,
    Read the article I’ve cited before you make presumption about what I’ve been talking about. Also see my other comments above – you’ll know I’m not talking about all Muslims.

    I’m talking about Muslims in a weaker condition such as in a minority vs Muslims in a stronger condition such as in a majority vis-a-vis the non-Muslims.

  111. And I said several times I’m talking about born Muslims in non-Western countries, not about Western converts to Islam. Read my comments above.

  112. But I’m at a juncture of life where I’m beginning to wonder if all their “respect for others’ religions” is really true or if it’s a deceptive technique of Taqqyyia which is derived directly from the Quran -

    (3:28: “If you [Muslims] are under their [infidels'] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them, with your tongue, while harboring inner animosity for them. …” )

    So, a “moderate” Muslim may be cursing the non-Muslim all the time in his heart – this is part of Jihad –

    This makes me wonder – does this mean that all those Muslim friends I have are also pretending in front of me?

    —————————————————————————

    I wasn’t making assumptions I was reading what you posted. Also, in the interest of justice, Muslims come in varrying hues and colours (ideologicall speaking) from every area of the globe. You cannot distinguish between converts and those born to the faith because they are not to clearly defined seperate groups. There is diversity within as well as between them. Are you saying all born Muslims from the ‘East’ are the same? Seems to be bordering on racist to make such assumptions and certainly does not have any bearing on reality. Some of the Western converts are amongst the most militant – Shoe bomber, 7/7 Jamaican bomber?

    I also cannot find 3:28 quote as you wrote it. Please check it again but I did find 4:59

    O ye who believe! obey Allah, and obey His Messenger and those who are in authority among you. And if you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger if you are believers in Allah and the Last Day. That is best and most commendable in the end.

    Also, the Quran speaks openly about hypocracy in many places, how could it then advocate hypocracy for Muslims? Either your quote is a mistranslation or has been taken out of context. I don’t mind checking if you can provide the proper reference.

  113. Moq,
    Exactly – and MD Azad has also quoted 5/32 again, despite the fact that Jay corrected him above regarding this verse – that it’s addressed to the Israelites, not to everyone and that his quotation is incomplete, the rest of the verse goes into some violent imagery and there are violent verses following it.

    He thinks people are not reading comments or they forget soon.

  114. @Daisy
    This article was not written by a Muslim. It was written by a group with these objectives in mind:

    The Forum sees the region — with its profusion of dictatorships, radical ideologies, existential conflicts, exportation of extremism, border disagreements, political violence, and weapons of mass destruction — as a major source of problems for the United States. Accordingly, it urges active measures to protect Americans and their allies.

    Also, what you quoted is not a verse of the Quran, you actually quoted from a commentary, this is someone’s opinion and not the Quran.

    So, as I unerstand it you have taken an article from a group who are anti-Muslim and see all Muslims as Jihadis and then used their opinions to try and inform all readers of Carol’s blogs about what Muslims are really thinking? How on Earth can you justify this article as an accurate depiction of Islam when it is biased from the start? I am actually shocked at this, I had thought you were open minded even if you didn’t agree with me but using this material to define how Muslims think and feel is just shocking!

  115. Sarah,
    I said read the article I’ve linked.

    I am talking about the born Muslims from the non-Western countries and I am making a comparison between their behaviour in different conditions. Take it or leave it – it’s your choice.

    Are you really not aware of Taqiyya?

    Anyway, see this entire discussion of Taqiyya here –

    http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Lying_for_Islam_(taqiyya)

    Al-Tabari has written a commentary on 3/28, which enjoins upon the Muslims in a weak position to make false friendship with the non-Muslims but hate them in their hearts. It is Al-Tabari’s commentary I quoted above.

  116. I am amazed how Daisy can quote or misquote Quran and change the meanings to suit her mood. And yet when people are showing her mistakes she prefers to take a non-muslim’s interpretations as the correct one rather than a Muslim’s one.

    It is very clear what is the intention and the hatred is noticeable.

  117. Sorry, you posted before I did.

    Even if it is not from Muslims, it makes a comprehensive use of sources and explains them in context. It places Taqiyya in the context of extremist Jihad and also shows how Muslims may generally use it in a weak position and in a strong position.

    Because of that this article is important. It doesn’t matter if it is written by Muslims or non-Muslims.

    I think it’s important to know how extremists are attempting to subvert democracy from this world – not necessarily by using military might always.

  118. A Muslim’s testimony may not be always reliable, if Muslims are taught to lie blatanlty to non-Muslims just to gain ground for themselves.

  119. @Daisy,

    You take the words of announced prejudiced people and then judge Muslims by the yeardsticks they define. You are allowing their prejudice to colour your views. If this is truth, that you take the word of a bigot over the words of Muslims themselves, then I have a great deal of pity for you and do not respect your opinion. You call Muslims liars because a professed anti-Muslim person says they are. What logic is there to your stance?

  120. @Daisy

    Amazing u are saying my true colour just becoz I dnt accept when u say “Prophet Muhammad was not true example of Prophet” and other anti-Islamic discourse? Did I do against ur relgion? Who is sick and hater? Have u talked agaisnt ur HIndu terrorists(who even tried to kill VICE PRESIDENT OF INDIA) like I talk agaisnt Taliban/Al-Qaida?
    U always live in deniel and try to show that Hindu terrorists are virtually non-existent instead of condemning them.

    I am sure ur Muslim frinds dnt know that u are such an Islam/Muslim hater that u can even say that Prophet Muhammad was not true example of prophet. Hahah u are showing true colour to ur Muslim frinds.

    What u say when HINDU TERRORIST BOMBER SAYS, he got inspired from Hinduism’s GEETA?

    He was the HIndu terrorst leader of LTTE, which killed and bombed 1000s of Muslims and budhists and even former Prime Minister of India – Rajeev Gandhi.

    And u know how many Tamil HIndus protested agaisnt govt and burnt Indian flags in Tamil Nadu states agaisnt killing of HIndu LTTE terrorists in Sri Lanka?

    U fabricate when u say. But when I say, I give proof. Still u say I am lier and hater.

    =====================================

    HINDU TERRORIST LEADER Prabhakaran of LTTE was inspired by HInduism’s holy book – Gita:

    http://expressbuzz.com/world/prabhakaran-was-inspired-by-gita/69693.html

    =======================================

  121. “Daisy, on July 18, 2010 at 12:16 pm Said:

    A Muslim’s testimony may not be always reliable, if Muslims are taught to lie blatanlty to non-Muslims just to gain ground for themselves.”

    ——————————————————
    Hope ur Muslim friends starts knowing ur true colour – sign of love and tolerance :)

  122. Sarah,
    They have used Al-Tabari’s commentary, which is accepted all over the Islamic world as the most authentic commentary of Quran.

    They have not transposed this meaning on Muslims. Al-Tabari has given this commentary, which has been followed later by other Islamic scholars. This is taught to Muslims all over the world.

    These people are simply bringing to the Western world what is not known there about what the Muslims are being taught in the process of their Islamic learning. They have not formulated this meaning themselves.

    Again, I’m talking about the born Muslims of the non-Western countries. I’m not talking about the Western converts to Islam.

  123. MD Azad,
    Don’t worry, I am not taught Taqiyya as a part of my education – that is, pretend to be a friend and hate them in your heart while pretending to be friends with them.

    This kind of deception is taught to Muslims as a part of religious obligation.

    My Muslim friends know very well what I think of Islam. I have free discussions with them.

  124. I even regularly show them my comments on this blog – something which you’ll not do.

  125. @Dasisy,

    U constantly ignore my question but always give diplomatic answers. What u say abt Hindu terroirsts bombers, rapist, murderers?

    What u say abt this true video?

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3829364588351777769&q=final+solution+india#

  126. Daisy, on July 18, 2010 at 12:31 pm Said:

    MD Azad,
    Don’t worry, I am not taught Taqiyya as a part of my education – that is, pretend to be a friend and hate them in your heart while pretending to be friends with them.

    This kind of deception is taught to Muslims as a part of religious obligation.
    ——————————————————————-
    @Daisy, I will be happy if u can show proof like I do. U know what is taught in Hindu Terrorists RSS run schools?
    If u want in details let me know. I DNT BLABBER BUT GIVE PROOF.

    Lets see first in govt run schools in states which run by HIndu Terrorist’s political party:

    See some here:

    1) BHOPAL: Students of government schools in Madhya Pradesh “celebrated” Teachers’ Day, washing the feet of their teachers as part of Guru Paada Pooja made mandatory by the BJP government.

    From banning nursery rhymes in schools two years ago, making Surya Namaskar, Pranayam, and the Bhojan Mantra compulsory in public schools, and christening teachers Rashtra Rishis, the BJP government seems to have left no stone unturned in saffronising public education, activist organisations across the State said.

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:rBUwAJUTxwoJ:www.thehindu.com/2009/09/06/stories/2009090659440800.htm+From+banning+nursery+rhymes+in+schools+two+years+ago,+making+Surya+Namaskar,+Pranayam,+and+the+Bhojan&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=in

    2) Why teach only Gita in schools: minorities of MP state

    http://www.twocircles.net/2010mar09/why_teach_only_gita_schools_madhya_pradesh_minorities.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Twocirclesnet-IndianMuslim+%28TwoCircles.net+-+Indian+Muslim+News%29

    3)
    Muslims oppose MP Govt’s directive to recite ‘Bhojan Mantra’:

    http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-204870253.html

    4)Saffronisation (Extremist HIndu ideology) by Education minister in school-
    Madhya Pradesh paints schoolbooks saffron RSS and BJP:

    Nice video showing Hinduisation in schools:

    http://www.ndtv.com/news/videos/video_player.php?id=1224263

  127. @Daisy,

    U generalise entire Muslims and blame that Muslims harass to non-Muslims convert so and so..
    Its shame that u constantly connieve what HIndu terrorists do in the name of religion but spit venom to Muslims/Islam/Prophet.

    Have a look on it that u will not like to look:

    ==============

    1) Muslims forced to convert to Adivasi Hindu in Gujarat

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Ahmedabad/Dangs_Muslims_move_HC_over_conversion/articleshow/3480907.cms

    2) Conversion to Hinduism a condition for Christians to return home in Kandhamal :

    http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/01/stories/2008100161861400.htm

  128. Sarah,
    Look at the endnote references in that article – you’ll see they have referred to authentic Islamic sources and Muslim authors.

    It’s not as if they have fabricated this argument – they are simply letting the Western world know about Islamic arguments that exist in the Muslim society and facilitate Jihad.

  129. “Again, I’m talking about the born Muslims of the non-Western countries. I’m not talking about the Western converts to Islam.”

    ———————————————————-
    @Daisy,

    U constantly ignore any good and peaceful stuff from Muslims and alwasy in state of “living in denial and unability to accept the truth”.

    What Born Muslims or converted Muslims?? See stand of born Indian Muslims and Indian born Ulema agaisnt terroirsm. But u need to change ur lense to see this:

    “Indian Muslims against terrorism”

    http://www.google.co.in/#hl=en&&sa=X&ei=681CTKWtHo6ivgPPl8nXDA&ved=0CBgQBSgA&q=Indian+Muslims+against+terrorism&spell=1&fp=d4c8a9d80ff1113a

    “Indian Muslims issue fatwa against terrorism”:

    http://www.google.co.in/#hl=en&q=Indian+Muslims+issue+fatwa+against+terrorism&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&gs_upl=31642%2C630%2C11%2C2%2C71%2C104%2C8%2C1&fp=d4c8a9d80ff1113a

    And ur hatred forces u to blame that born Muslims dnt stand agasint terrorists? What a hater and lier u are..

  130. ==============================================
    @Daisy,

    I HAVE SHOWN MUSLIM RELIGIOUS LEADER’S , ULEMA’S STAND AGAISNT TERRORISM BUT I M WAITING HINDU RELGIOUS LEADER’S ANY KIND OF CONDEMNATION AGASINT HINDU TERRORIST BOMBERS AND RAPISTS AND MURDERERS AND THEIR ATTEMPT TO CONVER MUSLIMS/CHRISTIANS TO HINDUS

    ==============================================

  131. @Daisy,

    Your indoctination by Islamophobes shows itself when you start talking about “taqiyya” a favourite subject for those who hate Islam.

    95% of Muslims out there couldnt tell you what “taqiyya” is if you asked them! As for indoctrination, I am a convert to Islam and have taken classes on Islam in more than one country and I never heard of the word or the concept until it was bigots and Islamophobes who brought it up.

    It is this concept, so well known by Islamophobes and so NOT known by most Muslims that allows these peddlers of hate to claim that there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim because they are ALL lying because their religion allows it.

    The more you speak here Daisy, the more you out yourself and your beliefs as an Islamophobe. It would seem YOU are the one who has been indoctrinated.

    Listening to you is like listen to the anti Semites in Nazi Germany. How you love to point out things you thinks give you the rights to hate others. You even said:

    “A Muslim’s testimony may not be always reliable, if Muslims are taught to lie blatanlty to non-Muslims just to gain ground for themselves.”

    What you are saying here is that there is NOTHING any Muslim can say about anything that can be taken at face value because they are allowed to lie.

    Daisy, yoiu are a bigot and so full of hate you cannot help letting it show.

    @Carol,

    I am all for freedom of speech, but at what point do you have a responsibility, as the owner of this blog, to speak out against the hatred that Daisy is peddling? It is your blog and to let the outrageous hatred being spewed by Daisy here go unanswered, to a certain extent, means you agree or condone it.

    She has openly said she reads and follows the words and ideas of well known bigots. Now she is on record here as saying that no one can trust ANYTHING a Muslim says, including you!

    What nerve, what open hatred for Daisy to post such comments on the blog of someone who is a Muslim themselves. Daisy made it clear that no Muslim can be trusted…and that includes you!

    @Daisy,

    If you believe that nothing any Muslim ever says can be taken at face value, that it all might be lies, then isnt it a waste for you to engage any Muslim at any level for any reason?

    I thought the world had seen the last of thoughts like this, and ideology likes yours when WW2 ended. When I read your comments it is clear that the Holocaust could very well happen again. It was the Jews before, it is the Muslims now.

  132. Md Azad,
    You have been repeatedly asked by people here not to deflect the argument away from the point of discussion in this post. You have also been told repeatedly that criticising others’ religions doesn’t validate the extremism in your so-called true religion.

    If you don’t want to listen to others and don’t want to address the topic of discussion here, please don’t talk to me.

    You can keep on saying whatever you like I’m not going to respond to you.

  133. @Abu Sinan,

    See what Daisy is saying Muslims are taught to teach non-Muslims and spread lies and hatred for non-Muslims.

    But have u ever seen her refuting my posts with evidence rather than balming me and calling me lier/hater?

    She should see what Muslims are taught from non-Muslim’s mouth:

  134. Abu Sinan,
    Majority of the born Muslims in the non-Western countries know what Taqiyya is – and they form the bulk of the Islamic Umma.

    They also form the bulk of the extremist Jihadis.

    Please not the article also quotes a Saudi scholar in this regard. So I don’t see why this discussion should not be made here.

    I hope that expalins things to you.

  135. If you don’t want to listen to others and don’t want to address the topic of discussion here, please don’t talk to me.

    You can keep on saying whatever you like I’m not going to respond to you.

    ————————————————————-
    @Daisy,

    We are talking abt Jihad, killing, terrorists here.
    Surrender that u cant prove all ur lie, u cant refute my posts with evidence and take back ur blame on me. I have no intereset in talking to a hater and I cant awake a person who is not actually sleeping.

  136. Dear All,

    I would like to request all peace-loving non-Muslims, Muslims and owner of this blog (Carol) to call on Daisy to prove when she said -

    - Muslims are taught to lie and hate non-Muslims

    - Prophet Muhammad SAW was not example of true Prophet becoz he misused Khadija’s RA property.

    -Ask her if Muhammd SAW’s wife Aisa RA narrated any Hadith showing disagreement with prophet Muhammad SAW and his behaviour or his inhuman treatment of his wives or innocents

    -Ask her to prove when she said born Muslims/Ulema dnt stand agaisnt terorism inspite of showing so many google links repeteadly.

    As for my case, I have been standing agsint any kind of injsutice and try to show what is Islam in CONTEXT and how anti-Muslims, terroirst Muslims or Islamophobic media misinterpret Islam and Quran out of context. Is it wrong ? Am I hater of non-Muslims? Did I talk agaisnt any relgion or God or Prophet of any other faith? How is it acceptable her constant baseless blame on me when I say something I do with proof?

  137. @Daisy,

    It is a COMPLETE LIE to state that most born Muslims in non Western countries know what “taqiyya” is. My wife, a Saudi citizen didnt know, and by extension, in the conversations I have had with her wider family, born, bred and raised in Saudi including Mecca, they had NO CLUE either.

    You state that all born Muslims know about it because that is what your bigotted and hate filled sources are telling you. Sorry, but it is just NOT true.

    Of course a scholar on Islam would know. But how you move from a scholar knowing to your claim that a majority of born Muslims outside of the West beggars belief. Such a comment is based on nothing more than supposition and what you have read by those filled with hate. Unless, of course, you can cite an empirical study that samples every Muslim country in the world and shows, numerically, that a majority of Muslims know about it. Yep, right. Dirty poor Muslims around the world, many who cannot read and right, but they are familiar with archane and outdated obscure concepts.

    The hatred you spread here is awful! Not only that, it is based on half truths and lies spread by those people who hate Islam and Muslims. Include yourself in that last bit.

    It is your hatred that allows you to suspend common sense and believe what is clearly complete and utter rubbish.

    As to your talking to MD, why bother? They are a Muslim and likely lying about everything they are saying anyway! It is your words, your concept.

    You are so filled with hate it blinds you to even common sense.

  138. ===========================================

    ISLAM IS NOT OPINION OF NON-MUSLIMS, NOT BEHAVIOUR OF MUSLIMS, NOT WHAT SOME ARTICLE SAYS, NOT WHAT SOME MEDIA SAYS, NOT WHAT OSAMA DOES, NOW WHAT TALIBAN DOES BUT WHAT QURAN AND ITS TAFSEER, RELIABLE HADITH SAYS IN CONTEXT.

    THERE IS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A RELGION AND ITS FOLLOWER. IN TODAY’S CORRUPTED WORLD, A MAN’S BEHAVOUR DOESNT REPRESENT HIS RELIGION

    ==========================================

  139. @MD,

    You cannot reason with Daisy. After all, everything you say very well might be a complete lie!

    You cannot reason with extremists, you cannot reason with those who have filled their mind with hate.

    Daisy is CLEARLY WAY over the edge of filled with a great loathing for Islam and Muslims.

    Now is the time for those here who claim to be impartial, claim to be even handed and just looking for facts, to come out and condemn Daisy. She has gone over the top, claiming that nothing that a Muslim says about Islam can be trusted because they are all taught to lie to further Islam.

    If those people here, on all sides, cannot agree to condemn this statement by Daisy then they are hypocrites.

  140. Abu Sinan, on July 18, 2010 at 1:18 pm Said:

    @Daisy,

    It is a COMPLETE LIE to state that most born Muslims in non Western countries know what “taqiyya” is. My wife, a Saudi citizen didnt know, and by extension, in the conversations I have had with her wider family, born, bred and raised in Saudi including Mecca, they had NO CLUE either.

    You state that all born Muslims know about it because that is what your bigotted and hate filled sources are telling you. Sorry, but it is just NOT true.
    ========================================
    @Abu Sinan,

    Yes u r right. I am born Muslim (but my fore fathers converted from Hindu some generation back like all Muslims in world).

    I promise with name of Allah, Quran that I dnt know what is Taqiyya. Its spread by hate mongers around internet world

  141. Abu Sinan,
    Do you have anything to say about how Taqqiya helps or doesn’t help the extremist Jihadis, since that’s what the article cited in the link above shows – using Islamic sources and quoting largely Muslim authors?

    As I said, this article also quotes a Saudi scholar in this context. So could you please come to the main topic of discussion and talk about it, rather than deflecting the discussion in other directions?

    Md Azad,
    Same for you.

  142. I am a born Muslim of non-West and I studied Islam under shaikhs, alhamdulillah. for several years.

    I have never ever been taught to lie as part of Islam nor the concept of Taqiyah ever been bought upin my studies. Never knew about it. On the contrary we were taught that lying is a sin.

  143. @Nas,

    Islam says lier will go to hell:

    Al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated that the Prophet said: “Three traits single out a hypocrite(Munafik), even if he prays or fasts and claims to be Muslim: If he speaks, he lies. If he makes a promise, he does not keep it. If he is entrusted, he betrays the trust.” [Al-Bukhari and Muslim]

    But now onwards, these are wrong we should accept and follow what people like Daisy’s version of Islam. Otherwise they will call Muslims are terrorist suporters, liers, haters. Its such a bad time that we need to learn Islam from hatemongers and Islamophobic people :(

  144. Dear All,

    Kindly dont see any site shown by Islam haters and Islamophobic people including the one given by Daisy.

    Also be careful of following sites.

    Anti Islamic, fake Sites with MISLEADING names:

    (4) http:// www. muslimhope .com/
    (5) http:// www. islameyat. com/
    (6) http:// www. islamreview. com
    (7) http:// www. muhammadanism. com/
    (8) http:// thespiritofislam. com/index. html
    (9) http:// www. abrahamic-faith. com/
    (10) http:// www. gnfcw. com/
    (11) http:// www. knowislam. info/drupal/mno
    (12) http:// www. homa. org/
    (13) http:// www. thequran. com
    (14) http:// www. Allahassurance. com
    (15) http:// www. mosque. com
    (16) http:// www. newislam. org/
    Anti Islaamic Sites apparent even by name
    (17) http:// www. islam-exposed. org/
    (18) http:// answering-islam. org. uk/
    (19) http:// www. answeringinfidels. com
    (20) http:// www. islamundressed. com/
    (21) http:// www. studytoanswer. net/myths_ch1. html
    (22) http:// www. challenging-islam. org/submissions/shariah. htm
    (23) www. answering-islam. org
    (24) http:// www. Islamundressed. com
    (25) http:// www. exmuslim. com/
    (26) http:// www. answeringinfidels. com
    (27) http:// www. gnfcw. com/
    (28) http:// www. dhimmi. com/
    (29) http:// www. chick. com/information/religions/islam/
    (30) http:// www. acage. org/
    (31) http:// www. apostatesofislam. com/
    (32) http:// www. secularislam. org/
    (33) http:// www. muslim-refusenik. com/
    (34) http:// www. icapi. org/
    (35) http:// www. hesetsfree. org/
    (36) http:// www. letusreason. org/Islamdir. htm
    (37) http:// www. kafirnation. com/
    (38) http:// www. jihadwatch. org
    (39) http:// www. anti-cair-net. org/
    (40) http:// apostatesofislam. com/
    (41)www.thereligionofpeace.com

    This is the sign of tolerance and also the reason of so much hatred of Islam from non-Muslims :(

  145. I do not see how 3:28 spells out deception and lied to you, Daisy, and those like you. It is a very simple to understand verse. This concept of taqiyyah, as you understand it, is used by almost all in the world. The west under the pretext of helping the Muslims and getting rid of WMD to “save” the neighbors have bombed muslim countries and is now looking to do the same with another muslim country. It is nothing new. The West has lied and deceived. But its ok.

    Just imagine, Daisy, that you are captured by some extremeists and placed under their control. To save your skin, you will do as they demand but in your heart, you will loathe them. Isnt this just human nature? Is this deceit? Are you lying to the capturers? So what is the difference in what you interpret as Quran is saying?

    And imagine now that before capturing you, they come banging the door to your house and demand to know if anyone is at home (so that they can arrest them too) and you know that your son is at home but in order to protect him, you say there is no one at home. So you deceived the extremists. How dare you lie to them! You should even tell them that you will call other members of your family so all can be arrested at the same time thus saving their valuable time.

    And you know very well, indian policitian use deceit all the time, its part of their mantra. And you yourself are doing it in this blog by saying that you have no problems with Islam and that you only dislike the extreme wahabbis while its so evident that you hate Muslims.

  146. Daisy,

    The surah which you are quoting was revealed around the time Muslims even though they won the major first battle, were still in danger. Theitr victory has made the enemies more resentful and hate-filled.

    The situation of the verse you are referring was during the during the battle of Ahzaab, when someone close to the Prophet who had connections to the Jewish tribes suggested to him that, if it helped the cause of Allah, he could ask the support of the Jews who were loyal to him on account of tribal bond, so that it would help strengthen the Muslim army. This ayah warns the believers to be aware of seeking support from the disbelievers.

    The most authentic tafsir is Ibn kathir and this is how it is explained:

    Allah prohibited His believing servants from becoming supporters of the disbelievers, or to take them as comrades with whom they develop friendships, rather than the believers. Allah warned against such behavior when He said, Allah will discard him. Similarly, Allah said,(O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies as friends, showing affection towards them),

    Allah said, after mentioning the fact that the faithful believers gave their support to the faithful believers among the Muhajirin, Ansar and Bedouins, in another ayah that if you do not behave the same, there will be fitnah and oppression on the earth, and a great mischief and corruption.

    Allah said next, (UNLESS you indeed fear a danger from them) meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers can show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly.

    What in summary it means is : Let not the believers take the disbelievers as their helpers and friends (something that is very normal in times of suspicioin, war …etc), rather than the believers — for whoever does that,does not belong to, the religion of, God in anyway — UNLESS you protect yourselves against them, as a safeguard (tuqātan, ‘as a safeguard’, is the verbal noun from taqiyyatan), meaning [unless] you fear something, in which case you may show to be with them through words, but not in your hearts: this applies to any person residing in a land with no say in it.

    Where does it say, “please lie whenever you can and you will be rewarded”. The verse is very clear except to those who hate Islam and want to spread lies.

  147. As far as I know, Taqiyya is very well known among Muslim shiea sect but not among Sunni sect who constitute 90% of Muslim population. According to sheia sect, Taqiyya is duty if you think what you say will endanger your life, your business, etc. They have rules for Taqiyah. Generally speaking, for a sheia sect, taqiya is not a lie but a self defense tactic in a dangerous situation. On the other hand, Sunni Muslims believe that Taqiya is deception and they believe that lying by any means or under any circumstances is a sin. There is also a huge literature in the Islamic teachings against lies, deceptions, hypocrisy. As far as I know also that mujahidin are Sunni not sheia and Saudis scholars belong to Sunni sect. Here is a brainstorming question, what make someone appear different and extremist? It is just because he is very candid and serious when he expresses his beliefs and takes actions. So, I do not think that Taqiya is relevant to sunni muslims or extremists by any means.

  148. Can we also expect some reply for the questions I put abt their faith’s terroirsm from the same person who keep manipulating Islam? Muslims keep replying their questions but cant hear reply from them? We dnt have right to know their reply and stand on theri faith’s terrorism/rape/murder/force to Muslims/chrisitans to convert to Hindusim?

  149. I think this video is related to this post , please be patient and watch it. Vali Nasr is one of advisers of president obama on middle east region:

  150. Medina,
    taqia is used by the Shia to protect themselves from the Sunni persecution when they are in that environment.

    It is used by the Sunnis against non-Muslims when they are in a minority or by the extremists to further their extremist cause as the article shows.

    Nas et al,
    Please note that it is not my interpretation – this is the interpretation of the Islamic scholars following Al-Tabari, whose commentary on the Quran is the most established one.

    To see the full list of Islamic references they have used, please see the endnotes in the article.

    Again, it is not the interpretation of some anti-Islamic organisation either – they are simply bringing to the Western world what has been written by the Islamic scholars.

    I would suggest everyone to first read the article before making comments such as this is my interpretation or an Islamophobic interpretation – neither of which is true.

    This is a well-established notion in Islam as the references of this article show.

  151. Nas,
    If you read the article you’ll see how 3/28 and other verses of Quran along with some Hadiths have led to the idea of taqiyya in Al-Tabari and other scholars.

  152. Daisy,
    who is Al-Tabari? sheia scholar or sunni scholar?and where the sunni minority used taqiah? and when? who?support your argument with reliable sources. and how can you differentiate the sunni muslim from shiea muslim in that muslim minority you have mentioned?

  153. This world is in such a horrible situation that people dnt knw their own relgion and dnt follow it but knows more about other’s relgion. Isnt it surprising people know more abt other’s relgion than their own and forcing that UR RELGION IS THIS NOT THAT AND U FOLLOW THIS “X” EVEN THOUGH REAL FOLLOWERS DNT KNOW WHAT IS THAT “X” :)

  154. @Daisy,

    You have misquoted a commentary as Quran. Commentary is an opinion but the way you pasted it you tried to pass it off as a quote from the Quran.

    You say that the sources are authentic but the whole article is by a group whose sole purpose is to ‘act’ against anything to do with the Middle East. They are a proud group of bigots but it your capacity you tried to say that this is the opinion of Islamic scholars.

    You are wrong to represent Islamaphobes as being Muslim. You are only continuing to peddle the bigotry they spew without consideration for tolerance or justice.

    The reason I like Carol’s blog is because it tries to give a balanced view of Saudi Arabia and the customs there. Carol is open in her opinions and many commentators have interesting points of view.

    Your point of view is not interesting when you present the words of bigots as being representative of Islam. Would you ask a Neo-Nazi to discuss the real thoughts and feelings of a Jew?

  155. @Sara,

    “It was well known that the Meccans had vowed to kill the prophet. Even on the day he left Mecca a delegation was coming to his house to kill him.”

    I think you do not read my comments. I said the prophet was targeted for death after his treaty with the tribes of Yuthrobe (look back). However, that was after 13 years of living in Mecca without being harmed, although at the time he was preaching against the local Gods. The reason he was targeted for death is simple, he signed a war pact with another set of tribes. In tribal culture have such disloyalty will get a person killed. It had nothing to do with religion.

    What all of you forget when you say Muslims were prosecuted in Mecca, is that Mecca was a center that had 100′s of God’s accepted. The God of Mohammad is no different in that respect. What the difference was is that the prophet preached that all other Gods should be destroyed. In a city that was a center of trade based on religious status, that requirement would have destroyed the position of the city and its economy. Never mind the issue of insulting the local religions of the inhabitants. Of course the city leaders did not accept Mohammad and his followers, since they were preaching intolerance. Never the less, in the 13 years not even 1 Muslim was killed.

    Even the biggest Islamic claims of followers being prosecuted does not come close to prosecution of other people of faith. For example the Roman’s killed thousands of Christians as a form of entertainment in arena’s.

    “What was the first battle? Oh, 313 poorly equiped and mostly untrained volunteers rode out to face an army of over 1000 highly trained and well equipt fighters from Mecca. Was this Meccan army just passing by?”

    The first Battle was Bader, but you have to look at the reason for the battle. The tribes of Madina were cutting the routes of trade of Caravans from Mecca. These were chronicled in Ibn Ishaq writings.

    The issue for Islam is this constant argument to explain all the violent Dogma and behavior of the prophet as a result of extreme prosecution. These stories just do not pass the logic test and they do not explain why the religion had so much of this hate text. Try to apply this prosecution argument to how the prisoners of Banu Quraizah were treated after their surrender and the entire house of cards falls a part.

    We are 1400 years after the start of Islam and this Dogma of resentment of others is still being followed by extremists. The peaceful Muslims are not addressing the issues and still defend based on this prosecution argument. The excuses range from you misunderstand Quran, you do not understand the context, etc. When everything fails, throw some accusations that others just hate Muslims. The fact is some of us do understand Islam well and do not hate Muslims. We do think the text and history of the religion have sufficient amount of violent dogma to create an environment of constant fighting with others.Look around you, Muslims are not just in a fight with the Christian West, they are fighting with Hundu’s, African Christians, Buddhists, Secularists and even amongst their own sects. If all this does not give you Pause to re-examine the religion and get to the core of the issues I do not think you will ever solve it.

  156. @MoQ,

    I don’t know if you read my post on the debate page but I am an Ahmadi Muslim. I don’t need to ‘examine’ extremism and intollerance or even violence within Islam, I have seen it’s effects amongst friends and family.

    But, Ahmadis believe that Jihad with the sword has ended and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad speaks openly about holy war no longer being fought with violence. It is from his peace loving views from which I draw many of my thoughts about Islam.

    But as I said, for me, war and fighting is not the major point of Islam although it is part of it’s history. When I ‘examine’ my religion I try to see how it can make me improve myself and help me develop a relationship with God. Obviously 1400 years worth of debate has not brought a concensus and probably will not bring concensus between us on the justification or validity of the actions of the prophet Muhammad.

    For me the ‘core issues’ of Islam are not violence but how to be a better person and to forge a hopefully good place for myself in the afterlife. I am not ignoring these aspects of Islam but I consider them to be historical narrative and not modern instruction. If the above concepts have no relevance to a person’s life or consideration then I guess vast parts of Islam are irrelevant to them and the historical narrative takes precidence.

    I do not deny that there are Muslims who are violent and agressive and pose a threat to society and should be rooted out wherever they are found. But violence exists in extremists of every cause religious or otherwise. Islam is not the only creator or harbourer of extremism.

  157. @sarah,

    “But, Ahmadis believe that Jihad with the sword has ended and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad speaks openly about holy war no longer being fought with violence.”

    Obviously Jihad by the sword did not end for all Muslims. If you think it should have, then your issue is not with me, your issue is with other Muslims that have been using the Islamic dogma and history to justify it. Perhaps you should focus in that area instead of twisting logic and history to indicate that none Muslims should not point out these issues of the religion.

    “For me the ‘core issues’ of Islam are not violence but how to be a better person and to forge a hopefully good place for myself in the afterlife. I am not ignoring these aspects of Islam but I consider them to be historical narrative and not modern instruction.”

    This entire thread started with your comment that the issue of Islamic violence was modern interpretation. Now you are declaring all of it is just a historic narrative. Ok so I will stick with your last statement.

    So if all this is just history, then how do you deal with people that take the example of the prophet and emulate him. This does not stop at the actions of his daily activities such as what foot and sayings to use when you enter the bathroom, they also include his views and actions he took on relationship with others. These groups are not criticized by other Muslims as a matter of a fact they are fevered for their adherence to the prophet’s teachings.

    If you describe your Islam as bettering yourself and pleasing your god, I do not have argument against that part. No one here argues against peaceful religions like Jainism, but Islam as it exists today and throughout its history is not quite so peaceful is it? Further, you are defending all of the believes of Islam as misunderstood, you are not defending your specific interpretation of Islam.

  158. @MoQ,

    twisting logic and history to indicate that none Muslims should not point out these issues of the religion.

    At what point did I do this? I dont have an issue with people pointing out their opinion of Islam but I do have an issue when a group whose sole purpose is to act against the Middle East is touted as being said to represent the truth of Islam. I also have an issue when a commentary is posted as if it was an actual verse of the Quran. It seems slightly misleading to say the least.

    This entire thread started with your comment that the issue of Islamic violence was modern interpretation. Now you are declaring all of it is just a historic narrative. Ok so I will stick with your last statement.

    Also, where did I say this?

    but Islam as it exists today and throughout its history is not quite so peaceful is it?

    Actually, for millions of Muslims Islam was a peaceful religion and helped them live in peace. There are many areas where Islam was not in constant war with it’s neighbours. There are millions of Muslims nowadays who are living in and promoting peace. Is every Muslim violent? Does every Muslim read the Quran and think it means they must go out and attack someone? Not at all. So, if not every Muslim reads the Quran and gets the same message either most of us are wrong and negligent in our duty or the small minority have misapplied the verses.

    Are you saying Islam is the only religion which mentions violence and has some small proportion of followers which are violent? Muslims are not one homogenous group and you cannot paint them all with the same brush.

    If the Quran really did encourage violence you would see a far greater percentage of Muslims doing this and not just the small minority which are openly denounced by many.

  159. @Sarah,

    “I also have an issue when a commentary is posted as if it was an actual verse of the Quran. It seems slightly misleading to say the least.”

    Look back I do not point an issue with specific verse, I have issues with the totality of the book and history. It is full of negativity against others. If you want to talk about historic narrative then the book itself should be viewed in that light. You cannot have one without the other. Religion is about history and revelations that happened in the “Past”, history and religion cannot be separated.

    “Actually, for millions of Muslims Islam was a peaceful religion and helped them live in peace.”

    Actually, you must not read history. Islam did not have any period where there were no wars. Tell me what 50 years of constant peace you are talking about, I am really curious what period of history you are talking about here.

    “Does every Muslim read the Quran and think it means they must go out and attack someone?”

    For your information I know thousands of Muslims and I do not think they are violent. If you read my writings here you will know I do focus on the issues of Dogma in all religions and not the followers. I also think people of all races and backgrounds have an innate desire to be peaceful. Most become peaceful in spite of Dogmas of religions or other ideologies. However, this does not discount the impact of these ideologies on making a minority of extremists violent. The impact of such violence is felt by all.

    So you understand my position clearly, I do not think you or the majority of Muslims are violent. However, you are subscribing to a belief that has a dogma, which promotes violence. The fact that you personally do not believe in those specific instructions or that you can marginalize them as just historic narratives. Additionally, it does not make them less violent or ensures that others can be believers and come to the same conclusion as you do. This is evident by the realities we see around us every day. As an example during the period following 911, Bin Laden was the most popular personality in the Islamic world. This was specifically, because he had accomplishments based on violence. To ignore such evidence is at minimum naive.

  160. @Daisy,

    Why do you even bother to ask me questions? As I am Muslim, you have already made it clear YOU believe Muslims have a right under Islam to lie about anything and everything to advance Islam.

    Either you dont believe your own claims that lying is okay under Islamic rules, or you dont mind asking questions to people you know are going to lie to you.

    Either way it makes you a few fries short of a happy meal.

    You are EXACTLY like the Neo Nazis who selectively quote and cherry pick sections of The Talmud to justify their hate of Jews and Judaism.

    As a matter of fact, the whole taqiyya argument is almost exactly like the Neo Nazis who claim that Judaism, as explained in The Talmud, gives Jews the right to lie and steal from everyone who isnt Jewish.

    Your brand of hate isnt knew, it is just like old school anti-Semitism. It is just the target of the hate that is different!

    If anyone hasnt noticed, and a lot of us have, there is a large amount of people who USED to post here who no longer do. I try to avoid this blog myself now.

    Why? Because it has become a forum for ideologues who hate Islams and Muslims. Many of the posters who posted here for years have decided to no longer post here and in, some cases no longer read this blog, because we really feel that the comments section has been taken over by those spewing hate.

    I believe Carol originally wanted this blog as a forum to educate people about Saudi Arabia, but this blog has really moved away from that. The posts that do not have something to do with Islam get very little comments. Those that have to do with Islam and provide a place for people to bash Islam get sometimes hundreds of comments.

    It is really no longer a blog about Saudi, it is a blog where people come to debate Islam, and sad to say, Islam bashers are the majority here since many of the rest got sick and tired of it and moved on.

    I dont think this is Carol’s intention, but this is how things have become here. It is sad.

  161. Quote: Islam has nothing in it’s history that can match 400 hundred years of Western colonialism and imperialism

    You are joking, right? The violence started with your prophet and continued right after his death. Look up the “Riddah wars” that occurred under Abu Badr (to force payment of zadat). By the time of the second Rashidin, Omar, the Umma was in a state of turmoil as Muslim fought Muslim for power and riches. To give you an idea of the extent of this violence, in three campaigns, the Battle of Bassorah (Battle of the Camel), the Battle of Siffin, and the Battle of Nahrawan, Muslim records say that 85,000 Muslim warriors were killed, by other Muslims. This period is known as the First Fitna. Then there were the wars with the Kharijites – and so on. These were Muslims killing Muslims for the glory of Allah. Three of the four Caliphs were murdered by other Muslims (well, actually, the slave that killed Umar was probably not Muslim. Umar was killed by a slave – there are two versions – because the slave master abused him or because the slave was angry seeing Persian children enslaved). The number of dead is unknown, but certainly it was significant in a small, sparsely inhabited area called Arabia. Lets not forget Karbala. I assume you know the story of the Ashura and why Shias and Sunnis love each other so much. When it comes to killing, don’t pretend that Muslims are better than anybody else.

    And there is India. In simple terms the Muslim conquest and domination of India for over 800 years has been called the greatest genocide in human memory. Alain Danielou said that after the Armies of Allah arrived, “the history of India becomes a long monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, destructions.” In his book, The Story of Civilization, famous historian Will Durant called it “probably the bloodiest story in history.” Fernand Braudel wrote in A History of Civilizations that as a “colonial experiment” Islamic rule in India as was “extremely violent”, and “the Muslims could not rule the country except by systematic terror. Cruelty was the norm — burnings, summary executions, crucifixions or impalements, inventive tortures. Hindu temples were destroyed to make way for mosques. On occasion there were forced conversions. If ever there were an uprising, it was instantly and savagely repressed: houses were burned, the countryside was laid waste, men were slaughtered and women were taken as slaves.” If you want to play the numbers game, go look at Hindu anti-Muslim sites – they have all kinds of number, many absurd in my opinion.While it is impossible to know the number of dead and broken bodies left behind, we do know the results because the sultans and maharajahs proudly kept detailed records of attacks, wars and destruction.

    And so on. I wont even talk about the raids (even to the gates of the Vatican), enslavement of millions of Africans or the carnage the Turks inflicted on Europe. See, MD, I can match you atrocity for atrocity. The difference is that in the West we don’t celebrate these evils. You not only make excuses, you say praise be upon him after the name of a man that started it all. You also consider the first rulers that started rulers that killed, plundered, slaved and raped millions as they expanded the borders of islamdom to be “rightly guided”. Does that mean what I think it does, that Allah told them to do those things? Think about that.

    Anyway, I am not making excuses or denying the evils the West has done. I don’t make excuses for anybody or anything. Personally I think the human race is a blight on this planet. On a side note, you might be interested in my study of the marriage and family relationships between the four Caliphs. I took me a month to figure out all the relationships between them (all? most?). They were uncles, nephews, cousins, or married to cousins, or brother-in-laws, or father and son-in-laws to each other. It was so complicated that Ali was his own uncle and Omar is unique because he was one of the few people in history who (by marriage) was his own greatgrandfather (The father-in-law of Mohammad married to the prophet’s granddaughter). Well, they might have been one big family but they weren’t exactly friends.

    MD, Islamic history is fascinating but hardly unique. Let me say that Muslims had no problem killing each other for power and treasure – just like the rest of mankind. I once did a study of the Byzantines, and they were no roses either, believe me. It seems that their favorite pastime was blinding their siblings and cutting off each others noses (a disfigured person could not rule). And so, human history is not about love and peace and singing happy songs.

    I am not here to be harsh or give comfort to anybody. Facts are facts. The problem, to me, is not the hate, violence and bloodshed, but the lack of honesty about obvious facts in Islamic history and doctrine. I am a simple person and I have my prejudices, but I try to be honest.

    This brings me to Aby Sinan’s comment that “There is global discussion and criticism of things in the Muslim world.” – I disagree, there is no serious discussion about the important things in the Muslims world. The terrible things said in the Quran about non-Muslims, or about certain events in the life of Islam’s prophet, are out of bounds – so much that no Muslim will ever get up and ask even the most basic questions such as “Are non-Muslims really lower that animals” “Was it wrong for the prophet to attack those villages and caravans by surprise”. Until Muslims are willing and able to discuss these things, there is no real discussion and nothing will change. Muslims will continue to blame others for their problems because they dare not look at Islam. This is also why Muslims “bigots” or “radicals” cannot be defeated.

    MD, let me be frank. I don’t believe that anything I say or do will make any difference. People will do what they want to do and believe what they want to believe. As far as I know, I have never changed the mind of a single Muslim (I have, however, embarrassed a few). As far as I am concerned we are all caught up in events that none of us can change. I don’t think this will end happily. Sorry – the future will not be nice. It is not my fault or even yours.

    Oh yes, I have been known to be pessimistic and cynical. You take care.

  162. Sarah, You are right. I need to put away the knife and smile. Or maaybe I really need to take a class in personal relationships. It is a good thing that there are people like you, Daisy and Carol. I mean, imagine a world full of me! Yuck! As to you being Ahmadi – I’ve met few of them. I follow events closely and am aware of the problems your people face.

    Carol has been very patient here. I have made my point so I’ll let it go. Actually I like her blog because of the mundane things that make life interesting. Islamic history and theology, although interesting, are not the things that bring out the best in us, or at least me.

    What all of us have proved here with all these posting and counter-postings is that we are a reasonably well inform bunch of people that have a fairly good knowledge of history and theology. Since this is going nowhere, I propose that we resolve this peacefully – let’s get together and sit down in a big circle and taste progressively hotter peppers until we have a clear victor – I’m good with peppers. Either that or a pie cook-off. I really like pies, too.

  163. @MD

    “Millions of non Muslims are converting to Islam day by day for the love of Islam.”

    Seriously? Do you have sources for this? By sources I mean something published and peer-reviewed, not a youtube video.

    Or did you just take a poetic license to make your argument more persuasive?

  164. Moq,
    There is no point in arguing with them. I feel they understand the points that are being made. But, they don’t want to acknowledge it. What will happen to Islam, the most perfect and truest religion in the world if they acknowledge it?

    Besides, what will happen to the project of Islam to conquer the whole world – by reason or by force? I feel it is the latter that really rules their sentiments now, not any genuine love for Allah, Muhammad or Islam.

    Do you think Madina doesn’t know who is Al-Tabari or the difference between Shia and Sunni etc? Do you think Sarah doesn’t know the historical logic you are talking about? Do you think Md Azad doesn’t know what Jay is talking about?

    Did Sarah not read my several comments where I clarified that I was talking about a commentary on the verse? Why do you think she keeps on bringing this issue after I clarified it, rather than discussing the contents of the article on Taqiyya and Jihad?

    Why do you think none of them has discussed the contents of this article?

    Do you think they don’t know the implications of all the arguments that are presented here about violence in Islam and how it leads to Jihad?

    Of course, they all know it. But they will not acknowledge it.

    So it’s a waste of time and energy to argue with them on Islam.

    Jay,
    No one can beat an Indian in matters of hot spices and pepper! :-)

  165. @Daisy,
    my question was (who is Al-Tabari? sheia scholar or sunni scholar?and where the sunni minority used taqiah? and when? who?support your argument with reliable sources. and how can you differentiate the sunni muslim from shiea muslim in that muslim minority you have mentioned?

    your answer is “Do you think Madina doesn’t know who is Al-Tabari or the difference between Shia and Sunni etc”

    Your answer made me remember one of my classmates who did not do his homework when the teacher asks him, “have you done your homework? (:

  166. @JJ Kactuz
    ‘Until Muslims are willing and able to discuss these things, there is no real discussion and nothing will change’
    JJ you are definitely right about it, an average Muslim in India knows very well about the issues which you tried to explain and they also know the fate for anyone who foolishly dares to debate them.Islam has great ideals when it started but on the way it was curropted by Greedy – lumpen elements.
    The situation got aggravated by Scholors who study and study in a rigid system of education, where they are totally cut off from Worldly life and its complications have poor understanding of the pain and struggle of a poor and needy and give opinions on issues which are not relevant to find solutions to the common man’s issues.
    All religious madaris have a fixed syllabus and no one is supposed to question any of the conclusions made therein.
    A relative of mine was studying in on of these schools and states that wearing shirt and trousers is not Islamic, I asked but wearing a kurta and Pyjama as you do was never practised in Arab countries.
    He also stated that women are not allowed to pray in Mosques!!!
    So how does an average Muslim handle this? Luckily in India we do not have draconian laws which can kill us, we simply ignore these fools and it is buisness as usual, the same happens in almost all other countries as well. Exceptions to this might be KSA and Iran (only nationals of these countries need to tell as their life style is hidden behind walls).

  167. @JJ Kactuz
    However I beg to differ with you on one issue that Islam is all about voilence, hatered or killing.
    All rulers in India who preceded Muslim invaders were also continously waging wars to expand their kingdoms, Ashoka was one of the top most warrior of them who himself regretted the massacre due to his own wars!
    It was common for Kings and Nation’s to fight and kill prior to WW2 so please do not single out Muslim invaders alone.
    Yes first fitna was an extremely saddest event which has afffected Muslim history till date, same had happened in Christian world, the wars in History of Europe are the bloodiest.
    We need not look back and get struck with this part of history we all need to look ahead for a better understanding and pluralistic way of life

  168. Arif,
    Thanks for both of your comments. You have appeared refreshingly reassuring to me.

    I find a lot of sense in your comments.

  169. @Jay,

    My husband is Pakistani in origin so i am quite confident I can do quite well in a pepper contest. Being of Northern English stock too (and working class as well) I am also very familiar with pies. But as I am watching my weight I’ll go for the peppers.

  170. I have always wondered why Hindus and Nazi have the same swastika symbol.

  171. Nas,
    It’s not the same. Nazis have got it in the reversed direction. Hindus use it in the opposite direction and never reverse it like the Nazis. The direction has certain symbolism in Hinduism

    As for why, you have to read about the entire ideology of Nazism for that.

  172. Daisy,
    Thanks, I didn’t realise that.

  173. Arif,

    The human race sucks. Need I say more? History is so interesting. I wish I have time to learn more, particularly anbout India and China. When I was young I was probably the only kid in town (or the state or nation) that had memorized the names of all the Roman Emperors between Julius and Constantine.

    Sarah and Daisy – I come from a mex-american background and do well with most peppers. It is not that I like them that much except in moderate quantities (although I do appreciate splices now more than when young – Carol’s post on spices was great). Eating peppers was mostly a macho thing (“I dare you”). Jalapenos are nothing but the habaneros will wake you up, and knock 99% out of the competition. Even so I can handle them without grabbing my throat – even if it is not much fun.

    I know that some of the hottest peppers are found in the subcontinent and SE asia, but no experience with them. Maybe the pepper contest is not a good idea if up against Indians, Pakistanis and Thais. However, I stand on my pie-eating performance, and weight not much of a problem for me.

    Medina, Al-Tabari was probably the greatest Muslim historian of all. I will never forget going to a library to get “his book” and then finding volume after volume after volume, all thick and small print. If I remember, there were over 30 volumes covering all aspects of Islam. It took me 4 months to get through them and I admit to skipping pages. I am not a historian or literary critic, but it seemed that sometimes Tabari lost focus or was too interested in details, much of which were irrelevant. Still, I can’t imagine a person writing that much a thousand years ago. Think of the research!

    I hate to do this, but taqiyya is much more a shia thing than a sunni concept. It goes back to the shia being a minority and persecuted by the sunni majority, even if those ideologies have shifted somewhat over time and space. Egypt and much of North Africa were once Shia, believe it or not. Often the Shia-Sunni split had more to do with politics and national identity than dogma. The fact is that there is a deep divide between the two groups at leader level and they absolutely hate each other (even if this animosity is not so much at people level). The Iranians, particularly, are still tring to avenge Karbala and the Saudis know it. If Teheran gets the bomb, they will threaten the Saudis, not the jews. It will get messy, but interesting.

    Take care.

    J.

  174. Excuse my 1000 errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation. Old age.

  175. @Daisy,

    I have posted many links and videos related to Hindu terrorist and their atrocities on Muslims and Christians to convert to Hindusim and some state sponsored genocide on Muslims. And nor reply from u.

    Regarding religion, u said Prophet Muhammad was not example of true prophet, then I asked abt ur God who checked purity of his wife by forcing her to walk on fire and the God who could not save his wife from Devil but no reply from u. Let me know if I am wrong. Its u who started bashing but I just replied. Dont u know anything abt ur relgion? But more interested in other’s relgion?

    I dnt get even a single reply and refutation from u. Its seems u are that kind of person who suffers from virus of inferiority complex.

  176. NN, on July 19, 2010 at 3:51 am Said:

    @MD

    “Millions of non Muslims are converting to Islam day by day for the love of Islam.”

    Seriously? Do you have sources for this? By sources I mean something published and peer-reviewed, not a youtube video.

    Or did you just take a poetic license to make your argument more persuasive?
    ——————————————————————
    @NN,

    I dnt make hollow claims and I dnt believe in lie. I M A PERSON WHO JUST BLABBER OR GIVE POLITICAL REPLY BUT CAN PROVE WITH RELIABLE SOURCE IF ANY1 SAYS I M LYING OR NOT RELIABLE.

    Please have a look here.

    1) CNN News: 1.5 Million Americans coverted to ISLAM in USA

    http://www.google.com.sg/search?q=1.5+Million+Americans+converted+to+ISLAM+in+USA&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=IRZ&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&prmd=v&ei=qIBETOilI8aVrAeV7p31DQ&start=0&sa=N

    2) TIMESONLINE-UK: 1000 young British women decide to embrace IslaM:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7135026.ece

    3) U knw Yvonne Ridley who was captured by Taliban?
    She realised extremism is not part of Islam. She, a person with brain realised that Taliban/terrostis do not represent Islam. See how she is converted.

    Sister Yvonne Ridley Becomes Muslim Islam:

    4) Islam Is The Fastest Growing Religion In London:BBC News:

    http://www.google.com.sg/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=5lE&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&q=Bbc+News+Islam+Is+The+Fastest+Growing+Religion+In+London&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

    For ur info, Muslims dont give/food to convert some1.
    If u want more proof, let me know. I cant tell something that I cant proof.

  177. I dnt make hollow claims and I dnt believe in lie. I M NOT A PERSON WHO JUST BLABBER OR GIVE POLITICAL REPLY. I CAN PROVE WITH RELIABLE SOURCE IF ANY1 SAYS I M LYING OR NOT RELIABLE.

  178. Jay,
    I know about the “macho” contest of eating pepper. But in India, it’s considered a “feminine” quality to pamper your taste buds by eating things like pepper and pickle.

    Yes, pepper is perceived as “delicious” in this part of the world. And if you are a macho, you should not give in to temptation and pamper your taste buds by eating delicious pepper!

    See, the entire attitude is different here! :-)

    The big question is – who is going to pay for all that pizza? If you are willing to pay for the pizza, I’m willing to eat a little less than you. :-)

    It is true that Shias use Taqia more than the Sunnis do. But in a minority status Sunnis can also use it.

    But after seeing Arif’s comment and after talking to some of my Muslim friends here, I have reviewed my opinion about Taqia. It’s not being used universally by everyone.

  179. Sorry, I mean pie, not pizza.

  180. Md. Azad Ali Shah,
    Perhaps Daisy does not respond to your questions because they are not related to the post!

    Seriously, the topic here is not about Hinduism it is about what makes a Saudi a Jihadist. Why should Hinduism or ANY other religion or non-religion be discussed?

  181. Deception is used by politicians world over. 9/11 was the biggest deception ever. Most goverments get by it, including the biggest democracy of the world – India.

    Islam does not ask its followers to deceive. The ayyah’s context was given before and it is very clear on what it means. It is not even a topic to discuss.

    Glad to know Daisy recovered from it. :)

    Back to the real topic … peppers? Jihad?

  182. @MD

    Did you actually watch the CNN report? Did you miss the big fat “ESTIMATED” quarter of ESTIMATED 6 billion Muslims? ESTIMATED is shorthand for “no one really knows for sure.”

    Even if it were true, 1.5 converts OVERALL in the USA hardly merits your claim of “millions of non-Muslims convert every day.”

    Yvonne Ridley does not count for a million people, even though she has access to mass media. Neither do one thousand British women.

    Islam is the fastest growing religion in the UK because Muslims have more children than Brits, not because Islam is a more attractive alternative to Christianity, or indeed to atheism.

    The point of fact is that no one anywhere in the world maintains statistics for conversions, whether to Islam or to any other religion. There is simply no such thing as reliable data on religious conversion.

    Finally, chew on this: Counting converts is like counting people who decided to go on a diet as part of their New Year’s resolutions. Check with them ten years from now and see if they fit into their size 2 jeans. Check on converts ten years from now and see they still are keeping things zabiha. Until then, it’s all advertising.

    Please understand: I don’t begrudge you the right to be Muslim or to believe that Islam is the most perfect faith in the world. Just stop pretending that the whole world agrees with you, or will do so eventually, and look for these signs where none exist.

  183. Jay Kactuz, excellent comments.

    Nas, Swastikas are ancient symbols, used from China to Europe. You see them on old European graves, it was a symbol for eternity. The Nazis hijacked it because they liked to imagine they had some roots in an ancient Teutonic past. It was never their symbol, they did not invent it, they only soiled it.

  184. @Nas…

    “Deception is used by politicians world over. 9/11 was the biggest deception ever.”

    could you please explain what you mean?

  185. @Aafke

    That’s really interesting, Aafke. Thanks. I was under the impression that it had something to do with Hitler and his “beliefs”. Perhaps the Hindus base their’s to symbolize eternity too.

    @Oby

    Well, there are so many evidences to show that it was all planned. And it was really what it seems to be. This is not something new.

  186. Nas,
    Could you please elaborate on that regarding the evidences and planning of 9/11?

  187. @Daisy
    Pls google it, there are many even some documents written on it and even documentaries by Americans. Sorry, I could give you the details here but it is kind of long.

  188. @Daisy,

    “There is no point in arguing with them.”

    I agree. This happens over and over. I replied to all of Sarah’s questions and arguments, but when she is asked pointed questions about the violence of the religion, she never answers. I find that typical of how these discussions go. They review your comments to find a spot they feel they have an upper hand. They deflect from the context of the discussion by arguing that point. When you try to point them back to pertinent questions they disappear.

    Through all of this they maintain that they want you to understand their position, when in fact all it is is deflection. Someone that has a position to share, should be able to answer questions.

  189. But when they do reply and explain in detail, they are accused of lacking in knowledge.

  190. this article is related to this debate and is very well written:
    http://muslimmatters.org/2010/02/21/is-islam-a-violent-religion/
    Jay , these words from you “Iranians, particularly, are still tring to avenge Karbala ” is one of funniest words I have ever heard in my life about Iranian.from where you get your information ?althought I wasnot surprised so much, cause talking about something that dont know about at all is a fashion in this blog!!! lol : )

  191. @nas,

    Ofcourse it was planned, how else did you think 12 evil men could pull off murdering thousands…i have no doubt at all they are rotting in hell.

    and why bring 9/11 in this debate, Murder – for any reason, any cause , any religion is evil, no matter who sanctions it. My cousin who was in the US on a short term project perished and not a day goes by where his wife and kids don’t curse the bombers.

  192. Yes planned but by who???? There were more than 12.

    Sorry to hear about the loss of your cousin. Yes it is sad. Think of those children who are dying daily in Palestine.

  193. Miriam,

    Quote: “Iranians, particularly, are still trying to avenge Karbala”. Yes, I believe that is very true. This goes back to one of the core issues in Islam: who are the heirs of the prophet? As a Persian I assume you know the story of the ashura, yazid, hussain and the rest of the gang. I used the word “persian” just for fun, in honour of the ancient greats of that land – you are an iranian, of course.

    There is much hate and distrust between shia and shiite at clergy level, but not so much at people level. The shias believe that the sunnis have “lost their way” (to put it nicely) and their version of Islam is distorted. The Sunnis hold the opposite view. If I had a dollar for everytime I came across the phrase “follow my sunni and that of the rightly guided caliphs” on Islamic sites I would be a rich man. This is just a statement to put down shiites, who don’t recognize 3 of 4 caliphs (except Ali) and consider the Quran to be incomplete or distorted (this is controversial) and the hadiths to have been falsified (the sunni ones, of course) .

    The fact is that the Sunni-Shia split is a major problem in Islam (of course both Shias and Sunnnis are themselves split into subgroups, but, hey, that is the way people are). I suppose you know that many Sunni-based governments actively oppose and persecute shiites. Recently Morocco passed a law banning Sunni preaching and literature (and so on).

    The fact is that this issue is particularly grave between the house of Saud and Iranian ayatollahs. The hate is deep on both sides. If / when Iran gets the bomb, it will use it against SA, not Israel. They will use it to avenge Karbala and remove the Saudi Royals. They may not actually use the bomb, but use the threat of it. The Saudi know this and believe me there is nothing more important to them than 1. Keeping Saudi royal heads on Saudi shoulders, 2. Keeping power. Not even Islam is as important as these 2 objectives. That is why there is talk of an unholy alliance between Israel and Saudi Arabia to bomb Iran.

    Well, that is my understanding of this issue. I am not Muslim or Jewish or much of anything but cynical – but it is interesting. I dispise the Iranian leaders as much as I do the Sauds, but I almost wishTeheran goes nuclear. Think of the implications! What are they going to do, destroy Jerusalem? Duh. What would Pakistan do? What about the nearby Gulf States? In one day, Iran would become the most significant, powerful Islamic nation on earth. Interesting.

    So what do you think? Why are my words funny? As a person living in that area I am interested in your ideas on this. Thanks.

    J.

  194. @Nas…

    “Well, there are so many evidences to show that it was all planned. And it was really what it seems to be. This is not something new.”

    I am still not clear on what you mean and don’t want to put words in your mouth. What is not something new? I know it was planned, of course. I am sure it took Bin Laden and Co. a long time to plan it. what do you mean? what evidences?

  195. @Radha…

    I am so sorry for your cousin. i know it must be even harder knowing that if the timing had just been a bit different he would still be here. Yes, murder is wrong…no matter what religion does it…and I am sure that the hijackers are burning in hell.

  196. @oby
    I do not really want to go into this topic as it not the subject matter but if you are interested you can google 9/11 deception and you will get the information.

  197. Jay…

    I can’t find any info on the banning of Sunni preaching in Morroco. did you mean shia by chance?

    I found this while searching. Thought you might find it interesting as it comes from the UN reporting on actions in a Muslim country…

    Extremely interesting read considering we are talking about jihadis and extremism.

    http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,4565c2252,4565c25f4d,49817d44e,0.html

  198. @nas…

    why do I get the feeling you are trying to avoid answering the question. Explanation has never been a problem for you…you write reams and volumes about that which you are confident. Arguing for days. I think it fits into this forum perfectly…as we are talking about Jihadis. I think you are dodging the question because you are unable to support your position. If it is an opinion that is different. If you are saying it is a fact, then you need to be able to bring some points forward.

    Until this point I always had some interest in what you had to say. I think you have made your position clear by being evasive. You, and others like you are part of the problem. Not being able to discuss this openly tells me that the rest of what you say is suspect. Being a conspiracy theorist undermines the rest of your conversations IMO.

  199. @MoQ,

    I have not ignored your questions but I just don’t get the sense that you understand my point of view perhaps. I agree that religion and history cannot be seperated. I have also said that I do feel the verses containing descriptions of the wars are historical narrative and I view them in this sense. So, on some points we agree.

    However, we have a fundamental difference of perception as regarding the actions of the prophet. I see his actions as being in self defense and as having been provoked by the actions of others. You see them as violent dogma. You quote the actions of war but from my prespective I see that most incidents were instigated by the non-Muslims. You have not mentioned the innocent Muslims who were requested by two tribes to come and preach to them. When they arrived they were all but five or six murdered in cold blood. You do not mention the prophet weeping at the loss of life from the Quriash after the battle of Badr. After the massacres the next war was fought while the Muslims dug a ditch to defend themselvs from the fighters, surely this must be self defense. So here our perceptions are fundamentally different.

    I do not deny that war occurred but I do not agree with your assesment of the causes and reasons for it. Also, you said that if Muhammad had stopped preaching about one God he would have avioded the problems. No doubt you are true but I believe in one God and if He sen a message no messenger ever stopped preaching that. Lot, Noah, Abraham even Jesus all taught the worship of one God. So saying that the prophet’s message was the cause of violence is also like saying the Jews were justified in trying to slay Jesus an innocent preacher just because he did not agree with the current ideas. If you support freedom of speach and of conscience you cannot claim that Muhammad should have stopped preaching his message to avoid violence. Why not lay the blame at the ones who were the first to pick up the sword and use it, the first to plan murder and ostracism, the ones who chased people from their homes because of what they said?

    It is a great pain to me that ignorant bigots use the Quran to justify their violence. I condem it on every level and would advocate measures to stop terrorism wherever it is found. However, on the points I have mentioned above I will not change my mind. Not due to ignorance or stupidity on my part but because my perception is the Muhammad was a peaceful and kind prophet who tried to preach social justice and tolerance for all. I know others do not agree but I have no need to insult or attack them.

    For you your religion and for me my religion.

  200. Oby, you are right, again. Where you see “sunni” in that sentence please read “shiite”. At least I got the first letter right!

    As to Morocco: Here is a link to story about “Morocco Campaigns Against Shiite Minority”:
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104237288

    As to Salafis, to me the problem is not the religious aspect, but rather the fact that the salafis represent a threat to the existing power structure in each country. The salafi movement is basically trans-national and seeks to make the polical sphere subordinate to the religious. That is a no-no to ruling families in all Arab/mena/Islamic nations.

    Take care, J.

  201. @nas,
    “Yes planned but by who???? There were more than 12.

    Sorry to hear about the loss of your cousin. Yes it is sad. Think of those children who are dying daily in Palestine.”

    i really don’t care who planned it, whomever did and whomever executed the plan . i don’t go for conspiracy theories, flying a plane into human beings is wrong yes i do think about innocents in palestine, especially children. but i don’t like to poke my nose there, call it apathy.
    Nothing i do or say is going to change policy in any major way, so i’m just going to sit in my little corner and do the best i can to help peoplei know.

  202. Sarah, let me say that you are the typical Muslim. You have an opinion and an interpretation of events that fits your narrative and you ignore anything that doesn’t fit your understanding of events.

    You talk about selective use of verses but do the same. You even end with a very nice quote “For you your religion…” as if this solves everything. In the real world your quote is silly. Ever heard of the apostasy laws? Do you think a Muslim that rejects Islam can say that quote and just walk away? The same hadith you refer to tells us that your prophet said “kill him who changes his religion”. Oh? So what does that make Mohammed? Does he outrank Allah? Is he a guilty of participating in murder? Why do you insist that most incidents were instigated by the non-Muslims when that is simply not the case. Most of the time the Muslims were clearly the agressors. Here, let me give you an example: The hadith says that Mohammed would go out to a village, and as dawn came, he would listen for the an Islamic call to prayer (Adhan) – if there was none, he would attack. Here is the link (at V. 745):
    http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/004.smt.html

    How can you explain this, or the page after page of raids and attacks, the looting and so on. You talk about not killing women and children but ignore that those things occured in attacks that resulted in killing men, looting and yes, enslavement of women and children that were not killed, not to mention the fate of the females (as in the case of the banu al-mustaliq).

    To me, Muslims ignore any logic when it comes to their prophet. You argue about not killing women in battle, yet never ask why women are exposed to war. Were they: a. part of an attacking army, or b. could it be they were in their city and homes and were attacked by Muslims?

    Why are Muslims so blind to facts that are right in front of their noses? Is it because the whole thing will collapse if you remove one brick? Is it that if you admit that M did horrible things, that the Quran does in fact teach hate and violence (Q. 9:111) then all is lost? Is it because you have so much emotional and intellectual capital invested in it that you must defend it at all costs,even to the point of defining your values according to Islam’s teaching. To me that seems to be the problem (but then again, that is why it is called ‘submission’). So, if something is in the Quran or if Mohammed did it, it is really not bad because …. (insert excuse here). Is that it?

    You loose yourself in cute words and pretty ideas. You say you want to stop terrorism. You are not a terrorist and you cannot stop it, either. Forget it. Ignore the Quran. Mohammed is dead. Instead, why don’t good, moderate Muslims do the simple things that are possible. End the apostasy laws. End the hate against non-Muslims found in so much of the Muslims world. Allow freedom of speech. let people to criticise Mohammad, the Quran and Islam in Islamic societies. Speak up for equality. End discrimination against non-Muslims. These, not terrorism, are the issue. When I see this happening, I will reconsider my position.

    Until Muslims recognize and remedy these things, I have no reason to believe they are honest. It is that simple. I am saying this kindly so you will understand why people don’t trust Muslims (or at least one old guy) – Muslims say one thing yet their actions speak differently. Worse yet, they pretend that bad parts of Islamic history and theology are just a big misunderstanding, even when this is obviously not the case.

    Talk about logic. You and Muslims say the radicals and terrorist do the evil they do because they don’t understand Islam. OK. The Quran says it is simple and perfect (5.3, 54.17 and other verses) but you argue that it is complicated and some people get it wrong. So the terror is either Allah’s fault, because he can’t write a simple, clear message, or you are contradicting Allah and calling him a liar. You can’t have it both ways.

    K.

  203. @Jay,

    I haven’t heard about the hadith you mention where Muhammad claimed he would kill apostates. In fact I do know that this was not in practice what he did. There is ample evidence to show that the prophet did not condone any killing of apostates. The treay of hudaibia is one exmple as I quoted earlier. Neither have I heard about attacking villages where there was no adhan. If a better reference or circumstance can be provided to the hadith (i read your reference) I am willing to look at it. The hadith quoted there seems vague.

    I completely agree that a Muslim’s behaviour must be in parallel to their words. I also agree that for many it is not. I do not claim Muslims are perfect or better than anyone else or that non Muslims are less than animals, etc. Neither does the Quran take this view.

    Women of all sides were exposed to war even before the advent of the prophet. But Islam gave prisoners of war much better treatment than they had ever had before. Where the female children were burried alive and raped Islam condemed these practices. After the battle of Badr the prophet allowed those people who were literate to be freed if they would teach 10 Muslims to read. If they could not do this they were released on condition that they would not join in a future attack.

    Why is only one side of this debate ever presented. We are always told Muhammad did X,Y,Z but there is very little mentioned about what the other side did to provoke this response. Why must I be wrong when I have in frount of me so very many good, compassionate examples of behvaiour. What was the punishment for the Meccan who persued the daughter of the prophet, causing her to miscarry and later die of complications from this misscarriage? He was forgiven.

    Why don’t Muslims repeal the apostatcy laws? Can I argue with that, isn’t that why so many of my fellow Ahmadi have left Pakistan, isn’t that why 86 people lost their lives in May because of apostacy? Ahmadis are put in jail for calling Adhan, saying they are Muslim, reciting the shahdah or preaching their faith we have been universally declared apostates. Do you not think I am not praying and making active attempts to highlight this issue? Do you not think I would be the first one to appeal against such laws?

    The Quran does not say it is simple. It clearly says that there are verses clear in meaning and verses suceptible to different interpretations and none knows their true interpretation except the righteous. I think it is the duty of every Muslim to study and think about the Quran and it’s meaning but sadly freedom of thought is dying out against the bellowing cry of the lunatic, fanatical voices of Muslims.

    I am a peaceful Muslim, I do attend and organise peace symposiums, interfaith groups, humanitarian aid convoys to all parts of the world regardless of religion, I do support freedom of speech. I am not alone in this.

    But the response always given is ‘there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim’ and you are ignoring history. Even within one family two siblings may have two different ideas about their childhood. You say I am ignoring history and I can say the same when you fail to recognise all the good points and the actions of the prophet.

  204. @sarah…

    I had not heard what Jay has pointed out before either. You say it is vague…I think it states perfectly clearly what it says.

    “The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used to attack the enemy when it was dawn. He would listen to the Adhan; so if he heard an Adhan, he stopped, otherwise made an attack.”

    what is vague about that? Seems pretty straightforward.

  205. @sarah…

    “I think it is the duty of every Muslim to study and think about the Quran and it’s meaning but sadly freedom of thought is dying out against the bellowing cry of the lunatic, fanatical voices of Muslims.”

    In this I agree. Ijtihad was a great tradition that brought the world many innovations. It is a shame, true shame, that that has gotten squashed and almost outlawed. god forbid a Muslim should think for themselves rather than let a cleric tell them what to do or actually question anything. All the clerics who like their positions might have to do some explaining.

  206. @Oby
    Ok, you are right that I am avoiding answering this question about 9/11, and the reason for that is that maybe it is out of place in this post but on re-thinking, it does relate to the topic. The other reason why I was avoiding, is that it is a huge topic.

    Anyway for your sake, I thought I will just mention a few things and point you to a site(s). There is alot of mystery around 9/11 and many have studied the events leading to it, the photos, the reactions of the people, the government …etc.

    Now people are seeking the truth because from the studies, it is very clear that there is more to it than just what is made known. Many research papers are circulating even on the net and there are documentaries made on these studies. People are demanding the truth. See this site : http://truthaction.org/ or http://truthaction.org/?q=node/5.

    Check out http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646 where it documents “The top 40 reasons to doubt the official story of September 11th,2002″

    You can also read http://911research.wtc7.net/ which focuses on the researches done by scientists and the evidences.

    And there are more …

  207. @Oby,

    It is vague because it does not state where or when this ocurred. It makes it appear as if the prophet’s only purpose was to go out and attack and raid, which it what not. Many ‘raids’ were against travelling caravans so not in villages at all. In some of these raids it was when the reconitoring party met a party of travellers and a fight broke out so these were not planned and certainly did not all happen at dawn or involve an adhan.

    Jay used the word village which is not mentioned in the attack so I guess it is this impression which I am countering. No village is implied in the hadith quoted. What many of the raids were were in fact reconissance missions. Therefore perhaps the prophet did not know if the travellers were Muslim or not so listened to the adhan to see. He would certainly have known which villages were Muslims and which were not. So by saying he used to attack villages – this is misleading. It is not what is mentioned in the hadith.

  208. I do not understand why the hadith on attack at adhan is the ulitmate proof that the prophet was violent.

    The hadith says : ” The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used to attack the enemy when it was dawn. He would listen to the Adhan; so if he heard an Adhan, he stopped, otherwise made an attack.”

    ” used to attack the enemy “- pretty much what happens in a battle.

    “when it was dawn” – it was part of a strategy
    “He would listen to the Adhan” – Muslims do this when waiting for prayer
    “so if he heard an Adhan, he stopped” – Muslims are supposed to stop whatever they are doing during the adhan.
    “…otherwise made an attack.” – if there was no adhan, he would proceed to fight the enemy; so?

    What does that proof?
    It does not mean that he would attack BECAUSE there was no adhan. And the attack is not made on the land where the adhan is made. So this makes him violent?

    People here are talking about things that normally happens in war time. See what is happening in wars even now. It does not proof anything.

  209. @Oby
    Ok, you are right that I am avoiding answering this question and the reason for that is that maybe it is out of place in this post but on re-thinking, it does relate to the topic. It is also a huge topic.

    Anyway for your sake, I thought I will just mention a few things and point you to a site(s). There is alot of mystery around 9/11 and many have studied the events leading to it, the photos, the reactions of the people, the government …etc.

    Now people are seeking the truth because from the studies, it is very clear that there is more to it than just what is made known. Many research papers are circulating even on the net and there are documentaries made on these studies. People are demanding the truth. See this site : http://truthaction.org/ or http://truthaction.org/?q=node/5.

    Check out http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646 where it documents “The top 40 reasons to doubt the official story of September 11th, 2001″

    You can also read http://911research.wtc7.net/ which focuses on the researches done by scientists and the evidences.

    And there are more …

  210. Oby,
    Thanks for that link on Tajikistan banning fanatic Islamic sects such as Salafi, Wahhabi and others. This action of Tajikistan must be commended.

    Fanaticism and inciting people to violence should not be a part of freedom of expression. Such sects must be banned from entering, establishing their centres and preaching all over the democratic world.

    I hope the US and other democratic countries follow Tajikistan in this.

  211. @Oby
    This is the third time I am posting this but for some reason it does not seem to submit.

    Ok, you are right that I am avoiding answering this question and the reason for that is that maybe it is out of place in this post but on re-thinking, it does relate to the topic. it is also a huge topic.

    Anyway for your sake, I thought I will just mention a few things and point you to a site(s). There is alot of mystery around 9/11 and many have studied the events leading to it, the photos, the reactions of the people, the government …etc.

    Now people are seeking the truth because from the studies, it is very clear that there is more to it than just what is made known. Many research papers are circulating even on the net and there are documentaries made on these studies. People are demanding the truth. See this site : http://truthaction.org/ or http://truthaction.org/?q=node/5.

    Check out http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646 where it documents “The top 40 reasons to doubt the official story of September 11th, 2001″

    You can also read http://911research.wtc7.net/ which focuses on the researches done by scientists and the evidences.

    And there are more …

  212. Oby,
    I think I know what NAS implies by the “planning and evidence” of 9/11, but I would like NAS to say it herself if she wants to.

    I have heard other Muslims talking about the “planning and evidence” of 9/11 – almost all the Muslims I have met.

    Now, the left-wing has found this a good strategy to oppose the Capitalist America, so they also use it.

    By the way, I did check the Google results for 9/11 deception. I couldn’t across a single reliable, well researched site. Perhaps NAS would like to provide one.

    I also wonder why specifically look for “9/11 deception” and not for “9/11 investigation” or simply “9/11.”

    This means that the person has a prior mindset that 9/11 was only a deception and nothing else.

  213. @Daisy, Oby
    I have posted reply to Oby thrice but it does not seem to be posting. In fact that was my first comment. I do not know why thist is happening. I hope it will not suddenly appear three times.

    All my other comments seem to be posting but its only this one … REALLY strange.

    I will try again.

  214. @oby
    Fouth time to post this.

    Ok, you are right that I am avoiding answering this question and the reason for that is that maybe it is out of place in this post but on re-thinking, it does relate to the topic. it is also a huge topic.

    Anyway for your sake, I thought I will just mention a few things and point you to a site(s). There is alot of mystery around 9/11 and many have studied the events leading to it, the photos, the reactions of the people, the government …etc.

    Now people are seeking the truth because from the studies, it is very clear that there is more to it than just what is made known. Many research papers are circulating even on the net and there are documentaries made on these studies. People are demanding the truth. See this site : http://truthaction.org or http://truthaction.org/?q=node/5.

    Check out http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646 where it documents “The top 40 reasons to doubt the official story of September 11th, 2001″

    You can also read http://911research.wtc7.net which focuses on the researches done by scientists and the evidences.

    And there are more …

  215. Oby,
    This is the 5th time I am posting this and it does not seem to be posting. I have changed the links …

    Ok, you are right that I am avoiding answering this question and the reason for that is that maybe it is out of place in this post but on re-thinking, it does relate to the topic. it is also a huge topic.

    Anyway for your sake, I thought I will just mention a few things and point you to a site(s). There is alot of mystery around 9/11 and many have studied the events leading to it, the photos, the reactions of the people, the government …etc.

    Now people are seeking the truth because from the studies, it is very clear that there is more to it than just what is made known. Many research papers are circulating even on the net and there are documentaries made on these studies. People are demanding the truth. See this site : truthaction.org or truthaction.org/?q=node/5.

    Check out … 911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646 where it documents “The top 40 reasons to doubt the official story of September 11th, 2001″

    You can also read 911research.wtc7.net which focuses on the researches done by scientists and the evidences.

    And there are more …

  216. Sometimes if the comment has a link I have noticed the comment doesn’t appear for hours. It’s a good strategy to remove the http:// and www from the link and post it.

    About 9/11 “deception” links, I saw the above sites, but wasn’t convinced by their method.

    I feel following link gives a good refutal of most conspiracy theories going around about 9/11. It also gives links to show evidence.

    I have removed the http://, since NAS said her comments are not appearing. Please add http:// in the following link or copy and paste it as it is in a fresh browser and press “Enter” –

    america.gov/st/webchat-english/2009/May/20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355.html

  217. @Daisy
    Yes I realised the http was the problem. Thanks.
    I hope my previous comments will not all suddenly appear.

  218. Daisy, you can also check this book about 911 :
    http://www.bollyn.com/solving-9-11-the-book

  219. @Sarah,

    “Also, you said that if Muhammad had stopped preaching about one God he would have avioded the problems. No doubt you are true but I believe in one God and if He sen a message no messenger ever stopped preaching that. Lot, Noah, Abraham even Jesus all taught the worship of one God. ”

    Of course that can cause issues. If he preached this his followers can only worship 1 god that would have been fine. The issue is he preached that all other Gods should be destroyed. That is not exactly tolerant. You did not address this point by the way.

    Note: I did not say if Mohammad stopped preaching one God, it would have stopped the violence (that was a straw-man argument on your part, which you built into freedom of speech rant). I said he preached that all other Gods should be destroyed. A very different argument and has nothing to do with Abraham, Jesus, etc.

    You also did not address the issue of Banu Quraizah, as a clear example of the violence. You cannot have a tribe surrender, then execute their men and take their women and children as slaves, while claiming self defense.

    Additionally, you claimed that Islam had a period of peace. I asked what 50 continuous years of peace you are talking about? Another one of the claims that you cannot support.

    I think Muslims are in an endless cycle of avoiding the real issues of violence of the prophet and the text/history of the religion. Without facing the issues, you will never solve these problems. Christians also had a bloody history, but you do not meet many Christians that will defend that history. Hence they faced the problems and were able to reform. When will Muslims do that?

  220. @MOq,

    So when I don’t answer I am avoiding and when I d o answer I am ranting? What wonderful balanced use of language. How well balanced your perspective.

  221. And when you do answer and it does not match their perspective, you are amazingly lacking in knowledge and reading the wrong resources!

  222. @MoQ,

    There are several salient points you have not mentioend about the Banu Quraizah.

    Firstly, they had entered into a constitution of Medina with the prophet and agreed not to support any attack against the town. The location of their homes was on one side of Medina which was regarded as defense by the Muslims when the Quraish came to Medina tro attack. They were a war like clan and known for their strength of weaponry and equipment while the Muslims had very little. At the approach of the battle of the ditch they entered into negotiations to side with the Quraish. This would have left the Muslims fully exposed to fighting in Medina and would have put their women and children at risk.

    After the battle of the ditch was over they retreated to a fortress. They chose to surrender to the Muslims and an arbitrator was brought to decide their punishment. Muhammad did not pronounce their punishment and all the tribes of Medina carried out the killings.

    It was not the normal practice of the prophet to do this. It is notable because it is an exception. Also, it is likely that, in parallel with the habit of the prophet, to punish people according to their own scriptures and it therefore this was a punishment from the Bible, not from the Muslims.

    Now, am I ranting or am I ignoring? Am I ignorant and uninformed or am I taking a honest assessment of all the life of the prophet or am I cherry picking the best bits?

  223. J , your information about shiia is completely distorted, I dont want teach you about shiia but if you want to talk abou it first become sure then speak about. funny words of your comment is revenge of Karbala , if come to one street in Tehran and tell those words to people, be sure they will laugh at you, you can try it. : )
    revenge has no place in Islam no matter follower of which sect you are.
    rivalry of saudi arabia goverment and Iranian goverment has no relation with sunni/shiia difference.Iran is a big country sitting on gas with a population of near 80milion which is near double of saudi arabia( despite the fact that birth rate in Iran is far less than saudi arabia)so saudi arabia have right to feel rivalry with Iran not Azerbaijan whose70% of population is shiia but is a small country.
    no need to wish Iran get nuclear , United State is helping him to achieve it.I have no idea about this issue , only thing that I am sure is that Iranian goverment or saudi goverment are playing the show that Uncle Sam has written its screenplay.
    if you want more undrestanding about Iran, it is good to learn Farsi and come to Farsi blogs.Iran is third-largest country of bloggers in the world after United State and China.and the Farsi language is ranked as the second-most-popular language in the entire blogosphere.
    thank you and have a good time.

  224. “revenge has no place in Islam ”

    Really? I always thought the Muslims’ thoughts of justice were partly revenge for past wrongs and that’s why if you killed the son of one tribe leader, you had to kill the son of the murdering tribe’s leader. Or maybe that’s just tribal and not part of Islam?

    The 9/11 deception talk is interesting. Even IF something like that were true don’t you find it embarrassing that MUSLIMS were in bed with the infidels in helping to carry out a terrorist attack on their own people (if in fact Americans were behind such a horrible thing)?

  225. Yes that is tribal … nothing related to Islam.

    How do you say Muslims were in bed with the infidels? Are you sure they were Muslims? Yes their own people …

  226. Sarah,
    But Moq did say if Muhammad hadn’t preached destruction of pre-Islamic deities, there would be no violence from the Makkan tribes. Moq didn’t say if Muhammad had not preached monotheism etc., as you stated.

    I think there is a need to understand this issue – if Muhammad had only prayed to a different god, people of pre-Islamic religion wouldn’t have problem with him. He actively preached hatred for the pre-Islamic religion and preached its total destruction. The aggressive reaction of the Makkans was a natural and justified consequence of this – you don’t really expect them to have watched silently Muhammad destroying their religion.

    It’s not so much a question of who attacked first in which battle and whether Muhammad granted amenity to the conquered after an victor or not.

    It is more a question of who was not willing to accept the presence of an alternative religious system – it was clearly Muhammad who didn’t want the pre-Islamic religion to exist.

    In fact, he didn’t even want the Judaism and Christianity to exist in the form in which they existed – he wanted a total change hem. He called them corrupt, fallen, and their followers in most derogatory terms.

    Please don’t tell me about the people of the Book argument here. His this argument was valid only if they stopped being “corrupt” in his definition.

    I feel this is a highly intolerant attitude. He had no business making rules for all religions.

    Seeing this kind of logic, it is natural for other religions to have reacted in an aggressive manner.

  227. @Daisy,
    The aggressive reaction of the Makkans was a natural and justified consequence of this – you don’t really expect them to have watched silently Muhammad destroying their religion.

    But Muhammad only spoke against them while he was in Mecca. He did not actually touch them at that time. Your ideas of physical violence and persecution being justified because of what someone says is quite strange. The actions against him started because of what he said. So in essence the presecution started before any Muslim actually touched any idol.

    Goodness me, if all Muslims actually believed in this philosophy then we would definately have a lot more Jihad.

    You are saying war against what someone says is justified but you are calling muslims violent. interesting.

  228. @Nas

    the way I am reading it is :

    ” The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used to attack the enemy when it was dawn. He would listen to the Adhan; so if he heard an Adhan, he stopped, otherwise made an attack.”

    the fact that he had to listen to the call of the adhan says to me that he did not actually know if the people he had his focus on were Muslim or not. If one is facing an enemy and is poised to attack you would think if they are an identified enemy you would know they are your enemy for a REASON. When you attack an enemy you should have some idea of who the enemy is and WHY you are attacking them.

    This seems to suggest that he came upon them in the dark of night, had no idea who they were (Muslim or non…hence the listen for the adhan) and if they were NOT Muslim they were fair game for attack and plunder. What had they done? Why was he attacking them? If he was going to attack them he should KNOW if they are Muslim or not…friend or foe. He shouldn’t have to listen to a call to find out. If his sense of direction were that bad he shouldn’t have been leading battles. How does he know he hasn’t attacked a FRIENDLY non Muslim tribe if the call of the adhan is the only distinguisher between friend or foe? If Mohammed doesn’t know then how much of an enemy are they? They aren’t bothering him or going after him….

    It reads in a general way…that unless the group he encountered was Muslim, any and all non Muslims were fair game for attack. This is your hadith…we didn’t make it up or change it in any way.

  229. ooops…

    I think my comment was supposed to be for sarah…oh well…make it general. sorry.

  230. @Daisy,

    Also, you are quiet wrong to assume that Muhammad was preaching destruction of idols before the persecution began. He taught that you should not worship idols, a different thing. It is widely acknoweldged that the Meccan surah are more peaceful and geared towards worshipping God and the commonality between the Abrahamic religons. So your statements about violence being justified are based on your ignorance of how the message of Islam developed. It did not preach intolerance or advocate physical destruction of idols durring the Meccan period.

    I believe that your posturings are based not on fact or upon knowledge. First you claim you dislike the violence of Islam and then you say that the violence of the Quraish was justified because they didn’t like the teachings of Islam.

    You are tying yourself in knots. I believe it is Islam itself you do not like. You are entitled to your opinion but at least be honest and say that rather than trying to tell us how lying, violent and untrustworthy Muslim themselves are.

  231. @Nas…

    What planet are you on????

    (I haven’t had time to read the links and I can’t as I am going out of town for a few days and woefully behind in getting ready…but I will read when I get back)

    Let’s say for arguments sake that the USA is involved who do you think actually flew the planes?? They sure weren’t Americans…

  232. Sarah,
    And it is also widely known that Muhammad didn’t have the power to fight while he was in Makka. As soon as he got power in Madina, he began intercepting the Caravan trades, forcing Makkans to fight.

    And taking over of Kaba and destroying the images there was not because Muhammad wanted pre-Islamic religion to continue and because he didn’t want to destroy their religion.

    He had every intention to destroy their religion from the start. I think it is obvious in the Quran and in the early Islamic history.

    I don’t think he just wanted to give some speeches and forget about the entire business.

    If Osama bin Laden gives extremist speeches against the non-Muslims, he is not just practising his oratory skills.

    It’s quite obvious he wants to destroy everyone he doesn’t see as practising “true Islam” whatever that means.

    I think it would be naive to think Muhammad only wanted to give speeches against the pre-Islamic religion and not finish it off.

  233. @Daisy,

    So now the only reason the Muslims did not attack in Mecca was because they were weak. But they were still weak in Medina until the time of the truce of Hudaibiya after which their number increased. And when they were strong they took Mecca without a battle. They destroyed the idols but they did not harm the people. The Quraish were free to migrate – as the prophet did – he would not have persued them to their new home.

    But this still does not resolve the issue that he was not the first to draw the sword. Your argument has just so many contradictions and changes of stance. I cannot keep up with the shifting quicksand of your logic.

    @Oby,

    The hadith in question does not say where these raids took place. As I previously stated the Quraish had said that they would not rest until Muhammad and all the Muslims were dead and Islam was extinguished. This claim was made quite vocally and Medina was under constant fear of attack. As a precaution the Muslims undertook reconitoring missions in the area around Medina to check the safety sitiuation and advance of any foes.

    It is entireley probable that this hadith refers to reconaisance within the Medina controlled area. If the unknown travellers were Muslim they were no threat. This is known as securing the borders or boundaries and was done by the entire world when in a state of war, which the Meccans had declared.

    This scenario would answer all the questions you raised about direction, night time, etc. Clearly they were probably reconaissance within his own territory at night.

    If the prophet was ‘raiding villages’ in the context of this hadith it seems illogical because he would clearly have known which were Muslim/friendly or not.

  234. @Sarah,

    “So when I don’t answer I am avoiding and when I d o answer I am ranting? What wonderful balanced use of language. How well balanced your perspective.”

    Unfortunately you did not answer any of my questions. All you did is change my words to reply and push an idea that was convenient for you. Strawman arguments are done as a convenient way to avoid dialogue and debates.

    Try answering even one of the questions I raised. Let’s start with how you reconcile the idea of executing prisoners in the hundreds and taking slaves with the concept of a person being peaceful (Banu Quraizah incident)?

    Now I asked you this same question for the 3rd time. I hope that you do not avoid it again.

    Another claim that you made was Islam was peaceful at sometime. I asked a real simple question, state a 50 year period where it was peaceful? that should be very simple to come up with if your statement is correct.

  235. Sarah,
    Does driving people away from their home under the pretext of allowing them to migrate as you say, breaking their sanctuary, banning them to come to heir own city and sanctuary qualify for peaceful acts?

    Do you seriously believe in this or are you so emotionally blind to the truth because of your marriage that you will not accept the truth?

  236. @MoQ,
    I have answered your point about the Banu Quraizah, please read it above, The main point would be that this punnishment was not chosen by the prophet at all but the appointed arbitrator.

    @Daisy
    are you so emotionally blind to the truth because of your marriage that you will not accept the truth?

    What on earth are you talking about? You are speaking without knowledge again. My marriage has nothing to do with my faith. Why do you resort to discussing my personal situation (of which you are in complete error). That has no bearing on the point in question. Why would you bring my personal life into it unless your argument itself was weak.

  237. @Sararh,

    So you are serious, when you say the prophet had prisoners then he lets an arbitrator judge them to die is a good answer. Now remember you claim he is a prophet of mercy and peace. Yet he had no problem condemning 700 people to death. These people were his prisoners and his Muslim men under his command including his cousin Ali participated in the executions. Also, he had no problem with distributing the women and children as slaves. Do you see the logic twisting that you have to go through to justify this claim of the prophet being peaceful. A rational person will call these events as atrocities. Again teh issues for Muslims is they do not want to look at simple facts and deal with them

    With this type of bad logic all atrocities committed in the name of religion are explained away, just to keep feeling good. Do you see how modern day Muslims that support acts of violence can explain it away. They use similar logic to yours.

    I hope some day you will wake up!!!!

  238. @MoQ,

    I agree that these acts would be called attrocities by today’s standards and I am not advocating them as mode of living. As I said, it is a historical narrative.

    What I dislike is when not all of the circumstances of the situation are revealed. The Banu Quraizah were in their fortress. They discussed what they could do. One of their own suggestions was that they kill their own women and children. However, they decided to surrender. Before they came out of the fortress they agreed to have a decision on their punnishment taken by an arbutrator of their agreement. They were punnished according to the Biblical law – there is no advocacy for such treatment in Islam and there are no other cases of it happening.

    The women and children were mostly bought their freedom by another Jewish tribe because that tribe felt some responsability for the planning of the intrigue. As for their being taken, they had to have some protection and home after all the men were killed. But it is better than them having been killed themselves by their own menfolk.

    Please do not think that I advocate such rulings, not at all. I am not here to promote such behaviour. I am just trying to say that these acts were not particular only to Muslims, neither were Muslims at the forefount of all aggression. Prior to Islam blood fueds over trivial and petty incidents went on for years. Islam attempted to stop these. Yes, people were punnished or beheaded but their numbers are very small (I do not include the Banu Quraizah here as this was an exception to the normal mode of behaviour) and their punishment did try to wipe out the constant violence and bloodshed which was common at the time.

    I am not trying to deny that there was war or violence but I am trying to show that it was in a context and was not unique to Muslims. Muslims routinely freed prioners withpout ransom. Many prisoners became Muslims.

    I think the problem is that the prophet was neither wholly violent or wholy peaceful. When I say that he was peaceful I mean that he disliked war and violence and took many efforts to forgive people and overlook their insults or aggression. Something unknown in Arabia at that time. He also forgave all but 4 people at the conquest of Mecca. He would personally have prefered peace to war, as was clear from his prayers regarding the conquest of Mecca and at the time of Uhud.

    It would be easy to pigeonhole him if he was either always at peace or always at war. If he was really a bloodthirsty marauder there would have been far more raids and battles, but this is not the case.

    I am not blinded by anything but I am able to see the context of the time and the situation of Arabia during that period. Moreover, although violence was used this was the exception and not the rule and was not the main purpose of the religion.

  239. @Sarah,

    - You can not leave this to historic narrative, when there are Muslims that believe that the prophet is the best man that have lived and should be emulated. His violent actions are part of what gets emulated.

    - The idea that it is only an attrocity by today’s standards, does not work. killing 700 people that are unarmed prisoners in 1 afternoon is a blood bath at any period in history.

    - You also claim that he was a a prophet from God, but then you expect us to accept that he did not know any better than to behave like the ruthless warlords of his time.

    - Regarding details of the story. All what matters here is you have a defeated tribe that surrendered and they were executed. The rest is circular arguments that does not impact the decision. The prophet had these people with no weapons, they were held under guard and presented no harm. A person of peace would have maintained them as prisoners until a better arrangement can be made.

    - Regarding teh women and children being bought by other Jewish tribes, that simply means they were SLAVES to be bought. Enslavement is about taking free people and trading them. There are many of these women that were also offered as gifts to tribes leaders to win favors.

    - “Prior to Islam blood fueds over trivial and petty incidents went on for years. Islam attempted to stop these.”
    Islam did not attempt to stop these. The prophet and his followers participated and escalated teh fighting. Read the history. They invaded many lands in the 200 years following.

    - “When I say that he was peaceful I mean that he disliked war and violence and took many efforts to forgive people and overlook their insults or aggression.”
    These are just words. The history shows different. In the short period after he took control in Madina, there was constant battles and raids on tribes. Now you can believe in these words you said, but you cannot match it with reality.

    -”It would be easy to pigeonhole him if he was either always at peace or always at war.’
    That statement is wrong. From the time the prophet was able to raise an Army, he was in a constant state of war.

    -”Moreover, although violence was used this was the exception and not the rule and was not the main purpose of the religion.”
    The main purpose of the religion is to support a man’s quest for power. And here you’re 1400 years later, accepting it.

  240. Sarah,
    I may not know your personal life, but you have consistently avoided the main argument that Muhammad was uncompromising in his stand that all people in Arabia should leave their religion and become his followers. You have avoided the main point I made – driving people away from their home, destroying their place of worship and degrading them by calling them derogatory names is not an act of peace and kindness.

    This entire conflict started precisely because Muhammad was uncompromising on these counts.

    You can’t explain away his atrocities on the pretext of context of time – he was supposedly the prophet of peace and kindness and had decided to reform his society according to what he felt was the right path. In that sense, he was not following the norms of his times. So why should we judge him by the context of his times? We will judge him by the yardstick that he had set up for himself and for everyone else – the basic question remains – why should he have tried to impose his worldview on everyone around him? He forced people to react against him. It is his fault, not the fault of the people he was continuously opposing.

    Please also understand that in Islam peace does not mean what it means in the modern democratic world. In Islam, peace denotes submission to Allah and therefore the silence – the killing of dissent to Islam that this submission brings. It is not the modern democracy’s definition of peace which implies equality of all, right to expression and social justice.

    These misunderstandings arise because of translation. When Islam talks about peace, justice and liberation from oppression, it does not mean what is understood by the democratic world.

    Justice in Islam is justice according to the Sharia, it doesn’t mean justice based based on equality of all human beings, regardless of their beliefs.

    Similarly, liberation from oppression means liberation from a rule other than Sharia. It does not mean liberation from a rule which takes away the personal freedoms of the people. In Islam, all rule other than Sharia is oppression.

    Equality to all specifically denotes equality to all MUSLIMS according to Islam, it doesn’t imply equality to all humans as democracy defines it. Non-Muslims have no claim to equality to Muslims in Islam.

    According to modern democracy, Sharia would be equivalent of oppression, inequality and injustice, not the other way round. But Islam means exactly the opposite of what democracy means while using these terms.

    It is essential to understand these translated terms in the context of what they mean in Islam, rather than what the non-Muslims from the democratic world are used to understanding them as.

  241. Moq,
    Perhaps you would like to comment on what I have commented regarding the difference in interpretation of terms such as peace, justice, liberation from oppression and equality, since you are familiar with the Islamic terminology.

  242. driving people away from their home, destroying their place of worship and degrading them by calling them derogatory names is not an act of peace and kindness.

    This entire conflict started precisely because Muhammad was uncompromising on these counts.

    Again, you are wrong. So you are advocating war because someone called someone else names (not true also)? Watch out playgrounds around the world.

    Perhaps if you read something from an unbiased perspective you would stop getting your facts wrong. Thanks for giving me a lesson on what Islam means but I prefer to make my own mind up and also I would seek to learn from someone whop actually knoows what they are talking about.

  243. @Oby
    “They sure weren’t Americans…”

    How do you know that?

  244. The topic of Banu Qurayza was discussed before and I still believe that it is Jewish narrative. First of all, the reference in the Quran on this topic is brief and there is no mention of mass killing. Islam teaches to punish only those who are responsible for the troublemake. To kill large number of people is opposed to the teachings of Islam. Additionally, POW are given their freedom or ransomed.

    Jewish groups that had surrendered before Banu Qurayza were treated leniently and allowed to go, so it’s unlikely that this group was slaughtered. It is well know what the prophet said to the one who was particularly hostile and abusive to him. He said : “Sons of Abu al-Huqayq, I have known the extent of your hostility to God and to His apostle, yet that does not prevent me from treating you as I treated your brethren.” This was after the surrender of Banu Qurayza. If this mass killing had actually happened, then Muslims would have adopted it as an example.. but the opposite is the case where “no soul shall bear another soul’s burden” is taken into account.

    An example is the action of Al-Awazai who was the younger contemporary of Ibn Ishaq, (whose biography of the prophet is what MOQ is basing his argument on) did not take the said actions of the prophet when trouble started among the people of the book in his time. He objected to the governor’s decision to move the community elsewhere, saying “As far as I know, it is not the rule of God to punish the many for the fault of the few but to punish the few for the fault of the many.” If Awazai, who was the imam, had accepted what had happened with Banu Qurayza he would not have argued with the governor.

    Concerning the murders of Banu Qurayza, only few persons were actually named and these were the real troublemakers who provoked hostility and these were the oneswho were punished not the whole tribe.

    The whole narration is mostly later inventions by the jews themselves. If one reads the story, he tends to see the flaws. Read this interesting article http://www.jews-for-allah.org/jewish-mythson-islam/muhammad_900_jews_notkilled.htm

    Typing this in a hurry so sorry for any mistakes …

  245. @Nas,

    If a message contains links it goes into moderation, hence the delay in posting.

  246. @Nas…

    Why don’t you tell me why you think they were americans.

    They were Saudis, with Saudi passports, they were not Christians but Muslims…

    The thing that bothers me about this is that if all those men had been delayed or refused boarding on the planes Muslims would be upset about how they had been profiled because they were Muslims. Yet, they take part in 9/11 and all of a sudden they weren’t Saudis or Muslims or in any way connected to Islam…and Muslims disown them. The mental gymnastics is astounding!

    there have been Muslim terrorists before and since 9/11 and Muslims admit that freely…why not these specific men? Is it too big a deal?

    Should I do the same mental gymnastics about the American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq?

    Well they aren’t really Americans, they are special forces in cahoots with the governments and powers there. and though it appears as if Americans are on the ground there for American interests it really is a covert operation for the Iraq and afghani government and tribal leaders.

    Doesn’t that sound a little silly? I just made it up. For all I know what I just said could be true. the point I am trying to make is this:

    Muslims want Americans to admit to their wrongs and I personally do not think it was right to go into Iraq. I have always said it freely from day one…I always knew there were no WMD and I HATED that Bush went in. I can only speak for myself on this blog but I know a lot of Americans feel the same way.

    Yet when it comes time for Muslims to admit that just maybe they did something wrong all of a sudden there is this big game of cat and mouse and huge efforts to explain away what happened and how it couldn’t possibly have been them…

    Nas you have always been a woman of conviction when it came to arguing a point. god knows you have far more steam and energy than I in that respect. I now know that you believe in the conspiracy theory, which BTW, is your right to do, yet you have demonstrated here that you are either afraid to discuss it openly or won’t…either way you are playing coy with little one line questions. I suggest we just drop the whole thing. I can see that you will not openly commit to a side and debate your point. Of all the people on this blog YOU are the one who likes to debate most (as MoQ pointed out once) as witnessed by your comments above.

    I find that a bit dishonest…I don’t mean to hurt your feelings because I am sure you are a nice person. But for me when Muslims won’t admit their mistakes, wrongs or otherwise admit to their own bad behavior (or the behavior of their country men) and yet they turn around and demand others do just that it feels really disingenuous and it makes them look to me at least like dishonest.

    I am leaving out of town but wanted to answer this before going. I’ll see you all in a few days.

  247. @Carol
    Thanks, Carol, yes I understand the delay in posting with links.

    @Oby,
    You sound be be so naive, sorry to say this. I respect you but its not my opinion that matters. It is the thousands of Americans who are demanding the truth. I do not know what passports were found but according to the study, those passports belonged to Arabs who were dead a long time ago. I keep an open mind. You can read and watch all the evidences yourself and see what you make of it. See what it points to and be fair on the judgement. it can Arabs, americans, martians … I don’t know but one has to look at the proofs.

    A lot of evidences show that the whole truth is not exposed.

    It is not that I am afraid to discuss it – its as I said that it is a big topic and not within the scope of comments in a blog. There are blogs and forums dedicated to this topic.

    Anyway I hope you have a nice time and looking forwad to having you back soon. Missing you already :)

  248. Oh and by the way, the cat and moues game is not from Muslims, its from Americans (muslims or not) themselves.

  249. Oby,
    Those troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are really Saudi Muslims, disguise as Americans because Saudi Arabia wants the Islamic world to be always hostile towards America. This is a ploy being masterminded by Saudi Arabia.

    Sarah,
    You have still ignored the main point that Muhammad was opposed and hostile towards the non-Muslims – simply picking out one point from my comment doesn’t mean you have addressed the issue.

    Since you don’t want to face questions, there is no point in discussing with you.

  250. Ooops, I made another blunder….
    I replied to Oby but by for some strange reason that I do not know of, I typed “Oby” instead of my name!

    I think it will take time for it to appear but I hope Carol can correct that.

    Careless of me!

  251. Nas,
    Even if you type another name, your icon is connected to your email. From your icon we can make out it’s you, so don’t worry about that.

  252. Oh ok! Thats good to know. Thanks…

  253. Oh my God, I am visitng this page after 3 days…never ending huhhhh…people’s all time favourate topic :)

  254. Yes, Islam says Kill Kafirs, slay them : Quran

    Lets see:

    Q2:190

    And fight in the way of God with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely God does not love those who exceed the limits.

    Islamophobic version shows only – “And fight in the way of God” (2:190)

    Q2:191

    And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the sacred mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers

    Islamophobic version shows only – “And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out …then slay them” (2:190)

    Q;60:8

    God does not forbid you respecting those who have not made war against you on account of your religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely God loves the doers of justice.

    Q;60:9

    God only forbids you respecting those who made war upon you on account of religion, and drove you forth from your homes and backed up in your expulsion, that you make friends with them, and whoever makes friends with them, these are the unjust.

    Islamophobic version shows only – “God only forbids you respecting …make friends with kafirs, and whoever makes friends with them, these are the unjust” (2:190)

    Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe. They are those with whom thou didst make a covenant, but they break their covenant every time, and they have not the fear (of Allah).

    Islamophobic version shows only – “Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe.” (8:55,56)

    But Islamophobic version never includes following, rather love to ignore and manipulate and twist to suit their needs -

    Even in War, Islam says to fight only Army not
    innocents,women,children,old people

    a) “Do not kill women or children or non-combatants and do not kill old people or
    religious people,” and he mentioned priests, nuns and rabbis. And he said, “Do
    not cut down fruit-bearing trees and do not poison the wells of your enemies.”

    http://www.awesomelibrary.org/Muslims.html

    b) Do not kill any old person, any child or any woman… She was not fighting. How
    then she came to be killed? – Prophet Mohammed

    -Reported by Michael Young.

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

    c) “Do not betray or be treacherous or vindictive. Do not mutilate. Do not kill the
    children, the aged or the women. Do not cut or burn palm trees or fruitful
    trees. Don’t slay a sheep, a cow or camel except for your food. And you will
    come across people who confined themselves to worship in hermitages, leave
    them alone to what they devoted themselves for.”

    http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1123996016532&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam%2FAskAboutIslamE%2FAskAboutIslamE

    Surah Anfal,verse no 61…
    But if they incline to peace, you also incline to it, and (put your) trust in Allah. Verily, He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower….

    Surah Taubah,verse no 6…
    And if anyone of the Mushrikoon (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) seeks your protection then grant him protection, so that he may hear the Word of Allah (the Qur’an), and then escort him to where he can be secure, that is because they are men who know not….

    Surah Anfal,verse no 72…
    Verily, those who believed, and emigrated and strove hard and fought with their property and their lives in the Cause of Allah as well as those who gave (them) asylum and help, – these are (all) allies to one another. And as to those who believed but did not emigrate (to you O Muhammad ), you owe no duty of protection to them until they emigrate , but if they seek your help in religion, it is your duty to help them except against a people with whom you have a treaty of mutual alliance, and Allah is the All-Seer of what you do….

    These verses were pretty much relevant at that time. People in Makkah waged war on prophet Muhammad SAW and his followers and drove him out. He wanted to fight them back. But people use these versees by stripping start and end sentences of complete verse and only showing hatred part to justify their ill feelings abt Islam.

    IN short Islam says that -

    -Islam doesnt belive in giving sweets/chocklate to those who attact Muslims but says to live like a Tiger not jackal

    -violence should be used only if the others show aggression first.

    -when u attact never cross limit

    -If the the attackers realise their mistake and comeback, treat them kindly

    -Fight only with attackers and dont harm innocents- women/old citizen/kids/animals/ and dont destroy property

    -Most importantly Islam says to respect humanity irrespective of relgion

    So Finally, “Understand and love relgion if what they are using is against us, otherwise ignore it” :)

    This misinterpretation and Islamophobia is not new thing:

  255. The point of fact is that no one anywhere in the world maintains statistics for conversions, whether to Islam or to any other religion. There is simply no such thing as reliable data on religious conversion.
    ———————————————————

    @NN,

    U asked proof and I showed proof. Now u reject CNN news.

    Every converts go through certain conversion process and gets conversion certificate and in country’s census, religion is indicated. ANyway, I have given reliable links, its upto u to ignore or trust those conversion links.

    Forget millions, Even if one person converts to Islam out of choice with heart(AS U SEE IN VIDEO) inspite of so much hatred and propaganda abt Islam, terrorism, its a BIG QUESTION WHY THEY CONVERT IF ISLAM TEACHES HATRED, LIES, KILLING, MURDER, RAPE?

  256. @Nas,

    US could dig out Saddam from underground. Whole NATO power and 242 countries in world are not able to find OSAMA BIN LADEN since 9 years even after bombing Afghanistan from sky and killing 1000000s of innocents and turning/creating 1000s others real terrorists and turning this world from peaceful one to terrorists’s world in this process. Billions of dollars spent to find OSAMA, but no clue for OSAMA. Only time I see Osama’s video is during every Election time in US. I am surprised how powerful OSAMA is!! More powerful than 242 coutnires? Or is he an imaginary figure who spreads video footage during election time and political crisis?

  257. @Daisy,

    There are so many verses of the Quran to dispute your theory and that of MoQ that the prophet was a warlord. Islam clearly teaches that violence is only allowed against those who are aggressive towards them. No aggression is allowed against noncombatants or others. So actually the Meccans had no physical fear from the Muslims.

    Permission to fight is given to those against whom war is made, because they have been wronged — and Allah indeed has power to help them —
    22:39

    And if they incline towards peace, incline thou also towards it, and put thy trust in Allah. Surely, it is He Who is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.
    8:61

    There are also many ruling about the treatment of prisoners of war. The peopl taken were prisoners of war, not slaves as people say. They were captives but not slaves. Many of the (going into 1000′s) were relaesed without any payment being taken.

    So, if after looking at all sides of the argument you feel that the prophet was a warlord and Islam is a religion of violence, you are welcome to do so. I however, have both peaceful dogma and teashings regarding the treatment of prisoners with humanity and compassion. I chose not to confer with your view.

  258. @Daisy:
    I used to think that you were just the typical garden variety raving anti-Saudi troll, but that Saudis in Iraq conspiracy theory just convinced me that you were just taking us for a ride all that time! Bravo and thank you for the biggest laugh I had today. I really needed it!

  259. @MD

    “U asked proof and I showed proof. Now u reject CNN news.”

    Should I ignore the word “estimated” in the links you provided to make you happy?

    “Every converts go through certain conversion process and gets conversion certificate and in country’s census, religion is indicated.”

    Not in the U.S., it is not. Our census does not collect data on religion. And there is no central accounting of conversion certificates (even if these are issued) across different mosques. So I stand by my assertion that it is not possible to claim with any certainty the number of converts in the U.S.

    “Forget millions.”

    This is exactly what I said you should do. Forget the claim of millions.

    “Even if one person converts to Islam out of choice with heart(AS U SEE IN VIDEO) inspite of so much hatred and propaganda abt Islam, terrorism, its a BIG QUESTION WHY THEY CONVERT IF ISLAM TEACHES HATRED, LIES, KILLING, MURDER, RAPE?”

    How should I know? I never questioned that all sorts of people convert into all sorts of religions every single day for all sorts of reasons. Hell, I almost converted to Judaism at one point to make my life easier but decide against it. Maybe someone should make a video about that too. I just pointed out that your fairy tale of millions converting to Islam every single day doesn’t have any basis in fact. Sorry to bust your bubble.

    And I notice you never address my point that converting at one point of time in your life means nothing. It’s compliance over decades that makes it happen – just like a diet!

    I will tell you what data could convince me if it was available. If all converts were registered in a central database (which they are not), and then surveyed annually by name (which they are not), and if twenty years later this cohort still identified and practiced as Muslims, then you’d have some basis. Otherwise, you are just a dude with bad spelling skills typing in ALL CAPS, as if that makes your argument any stronger.

  260. @Saudi Jawa,

    She isnt just an anti Saudi troll, she is an anti Muslim and anti Islam troll. She even openly talks about getting her information from some of the best known Islamophobes in the West.

    It is kind of sad, for all of her talk about the hate peddled by Islamic extremists, she fails to see the tonnes of hate she herself is pushing around.

  261. @Daisy, or should it be

    You write:

    “Those troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are really Saudi Muslims, disguise as Americans because Saudi Arabia wants the Islamic world to be always hostile towards America. This is a ploy being masterminded by Saudi Arabia.”

    You just blew ANY credibility you had away. The American troops in Iraq are really Saudi? Are you serious?

    I am glad you are making this claim because maybe now some people that might have been border line about what to think about you will be pushed over the edge.

    This claim borders on insanity.

    At this point there is no way anyone should take anything you say seriously.

  262. @Daisy, MoQ

    As regards the claims that Islam is intollerant and the prophet was a warlord I refer you to the words of Abu Sufiyan when he was in Syria. Abu Sufyan was a leader of the Quraish and a general in their battles against the Muslims. When he was asked what the prophet taught he replied:

    That we should worship One God and not set up equals with Him. He preaches against the idols our forefathers worshipped. He wants us instead to worship only One God, to speak the truth only and always abjure all vicious and corrupt practices. He exorts us to be good to one another and to keep our covenants and discharge our trusts.

    Now, this was said when Muhammad was in Medina, after the battle of the ditch and the punnishment of Banu Quraizah and Banu Mustaliq.

    Notice there is nothing about taqiyya or lying. There are no war crimes or attrocities mentioned. This is an opinion of an enemy of Islam, one of Islam’s biggest enemies and also a contemporary of the prophet.

    I don’t think these quotes will change your mind but they certainly confirm my viewpoints. Also, the prophet did not try to ‘wipe out’ idol worship. He taught against it (as did all prophets) and he did later destroy the idols of the Kaaba but people were safe in their own homes and what they did there was a private affair. So I am sorry I believe most of Daisy’s arguments about what the terms of Islam mean to be baseless.

  263. @Abu Sinan and @Saudi Jawa;

    Daisy was making an analogy to Nas’ absurd claim of 911 not being the actions of Saudi Arabians. I don’t know how you could have missed that.

  264. @Daisy,

    Hey….I was in Iraq….and I certainly am not a Saudi and neither were the hundreds of others I worked with!

  265. Daisy, obviously some people didn’t get your sarcasm. Hehehe. :D

  266. @Madelenas,

    I dont know if she was joking or not. Her beliefs about Saudis/Islam/Muslims are SO over the top that it certainly would fit in. That is EXACTLY why people here had no problem with the idea that she’d think something like this.

    People that she looks to for answers on Islam and Muslims are on the extreme end and ascribe all sorts of various plots to Islam and Muslims.

    It would be par for the course! It would seem even Carol thinks that Daisy is completely serious. I think she is too, but no doubt she’ll now come back and say “just kidding” when she sees how beyond stupid it looks.

  267. Carol,
    You were caught too!

    But I give you the benefit of doubt – perhaps the effect of chemotherapy.

    Of course Madalenas and Susanne have got me right.

    And Abu Sinan,

    Only a little while ago you were claiming to be the native speaker of English and trying to “educate” me on the nuances of English! :-)

  268. By the way, the conspiracy of 911 is not my “claim”; it is what americans are saying. I am just referring to that.

    I always wonderd about those blond, blue-eyed Saudi soldiers in Iraq.

  269. @Sarah

    No matter how many evidences we show, it does not matter to those are already fixed in their minds. They cannot/will not hear, see or speak on it. (Sounds familiar?)

  270. @Daisy,

    I knew you’d now claim you dont believe your crazy conspiracy theory! It looked a bit kooky, even for you.

    That is what happens when you read all of those raving Islamophobes and then you try to pass yourself off as someone with unbiased knowledge about Islam and Muslims.

    You are as filled with hate as any jihadi. Your own posts prove it! So continue to tell everyone about how you read Spencer and Emmerson and everyone will just quickly realise why you hate Islam and Muslims so much and where you get your crazy conspiracy theories from.

    Funny, you are just like Middle Easterners who are so quick to believe anything. I guess you just had the sense to back off of it quickly because you realised it made you look like a nutter.

    So at least you havent lost all of your common sense yet.

  271. Daisy,
    It was VERY clear to me as well that you were being sarcastic.

  272. Yes, Lynn,
    Anyone who reads Nas’ and Oby’s comments above mine can make it out.

    Abu Sinan is making much ado about nothing – it’s his old strategy of diverting the discussion away from the main topic.

  273. @Daisy – you got me! Blame it on chemo! (laugh)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,092 other followers

%d bloggers like this: