cf ALLAH is te creator and sustainer of the world and the god of abraham- most definitely not an idol-
we say many times a day la ilaha ilalla- there is no god but god- and god is clearly one to muslims and the only unforgivable sin in islam is to set up other gods beside ALLAH- just to let you know-
peace

LA ILAH ILALLA
THERE IS NO GOD BUT GOD (Islam)

SHEMA Y'ISROEL ADONAI ELOHIM ADONAI ECHAD
HEAR O ISRAEL THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE GOD (Judaism)

same prayer- same god

In the Bible we see men praying to idols and we are told in the Bible that these idols have no power. The prayers to these idols are useless and further praying to an idol also grieves God. Allah is an idol and the ten commandments are pretty clear, for Jews and Christians, that the true God demands our complete loyalty. Everyone praying to their particular idol over an ill person is a wonderful bonding event and nobody should be be contentious about the kind, caring thoughts being expressed through prayer by those who love him. Those kind, loving thoughts and well wishes are to be cherished. On a deeper level, one should be concerned about prayer from the standpoint of their relationship with the true, living God allowing other aspects to become secondary.

Mr. Patel, I had not noticed the hate post that immediately preceded my own. Do you understand now why I get so angry? Damn near Four Centuries of that crap Sir. They are demons, there is no other explanation. They just chose to look like white folks here because white folks have all the power.

Mr. Patel, your friend Marvin; The same question cried out from the Nazi Concentration Camps. And to my beloved Jewish Brothers and Sisters I say this to you here and now...you bring it upon yourselves. Let me say it again, YOU BRING IT UPON YOURSELVES! Adolph Hitler was a Christ turned into an Anti-Christ. Arc Angel Lucifer does not create. If Lucifer had that power why would perversion, and choice be necessary to dominate this world? That gives me no pleasure, because if not for the grace of God and the Love of two African-American parents, there go I as well. I, the son of a Jew was cast off for the good of the family like trash. I hold no animosity towards my biological mother. That was in a time when blacks were still being lynched for supposedly whistling at white women. To my Jewish Brothers and Sisters, oh vey! What more can I say? I love you too. Pray to God, love like yours I do not need. chuckles.... just kidding. no, really...serious...no no that won't be necessary....what the hell is that for??? RUN!!!!! LOL

Muhammadans, please read the Koran, the hadiths icluding by Imam Malik, the Sirat Rasulallah by Ibn Ishaq and the hitory of Muhammad by Tabari.

There is one inescapable conclusion: Muhammad was a rapist, a slaveowner, a child molestor, a bandit and a Jew hating ethnic cleanser.

When Muhammad, a 56 year old self-proclaimed, slaveowning, murderous prophet took nine year old Aisha to bed while she was still playing with her dolls, it was clear rape. The child knew nothing about sex, was not ready and this criminal prophet took advantage of her. I am not excusing Abu Bakr, Aisha's father but Abu Bakr was not a prophet and Moe was.

Mr. PATEL (sorry, I am notoriously bad with names)

You mentioned poetry. The foundation of lyrics, and music is both the key and the lock into our culture. It can serve you well and form an immediate point of reference/credibility with youth. Heeeyyyah! Good God!!! God Bless you Mr. Brown.

Correction Ms. Janet Jackson, or Ms. Jackson and no young lady...do NOT go there. Let me break it out right here, God Bless you and your entire family and crew. I love you all, I do I do...what can I say that you all have not already said? Can't mess with perfection! Can't touch that MC, right? Sorry folks this is not disrepectful, this is an honor for me, and I will come here first, not last as time evaporates. God Bless you all, and I will attempt to stay on topic, but there is so much inter-relatedness who is to say what is and is not on topic? Oh, right...there are moderators here ahem. Sorry. Love you Two! I'll be Bach.

Mr. Patell, that is a very beautiful experience to share. You see, God's Gift to children, Marvin searches the papers for proof. Like so many of us his mind rails against the existence of God when the papers contain nothing but proof of non-existence. Man's time is not infinite. Not individually, nor collectively. We did not listen 2007 years ago. What has really changed since then? You struggle to save the children and that is a Blessing of unimaginable Power and I thank you Brother, I thank from all that is in my heart. Let us hope that their parents do not destroy the world before they have their chance to make it a better place, living in a world they did not make, as Ms. Janice Jackson testified to years ago. May God continue to Bless you with Love, Light, Heart, Truth, Beauty, Patience, and the Joy of Children for as long as you can stand it my brother, for as long as you can stand it. For they will try you, and they will find you so so worthy over and over again smile....but unlike far too many adults they know that they still have much to learn. Mind the parents in this day and age. I fell, and I feel that something is terribly wrong with this generation. I get a little passionate when people talk without listening. I'll try not to do more harm than good, but I will not stand by and watch as God's gifts....those such as yourself....get NAILED again. amen. btw... Has anyone seen my brother Michael?

Victoria,

You are free to and should ignore Jai Khosla and his series of postings here. An evangelical or a neocon or both.

Don't even correct him that we are not Musulmans or Mahometans, or Muhammadans, or Moslems etc. Never ever waste your time with this sort of postings.

No one is going to make your responsible to answer all and any questions on Islam and/or Muslims in these On Faith threads. Nor should you. It is like asking Catholics here on the IRA and on any given Papal Bull of hundreds of years ago.

And American Thinker is a notorious neocon magazine that consistently published articles along the above lines. It has quite consistently and persistently manufacture and disseminate Islamophopbia, all with great urgency and earnestness.

And Victoria, if anyone ask about the sex life or purported rape by the Prophet Muhammad PBUH, just let it pass. Other favourites by evangelicals are the Suras on war, on wife beatings etc. It is always by the evangelicals. They said the same thing over and over when we were growing up and studying in their schools in trying to convert us from Islam to Christianity. They can never convincingly persuade on the Trinity of God and Divinity of Christ.

Child and spouse abuse in non-Muslim US is higher than in many Muslim majority countries. Mr. Jai Khosla can look up the stats himself. One in every four child.

Khosla, by the way, never said he is against rape, child and spouse abuse currently happening. Nor did he say if he is in any group to fight against that.

Muhammad's infinite kindness. From American Thinker

February 06, 2007

HomeArchivesRSS SyndicationMerchandiseDonationsContactAboutSearch

Muhammad's Dead Poets Society
By James Arlandson

The peaceful non—assassinations of mockers

In their replies to the uproar over satirical depictions of the Prophet Muhammad, Muslim spokespersons who have access to the national media have recently withheld some valuable but unpleasant information about early Islam. Killing those who ridicule Muhammad is in the Quran.

On national television, Feb 2, 2006, Ibrahim Hooper, a leader of the Council on American—Islamic Relations (CAIR), spoke only of the forgiveness and kindness of his prophet.

HOOPER: Let me tell you how the Prophet Muhammad responded to attacks on himself.

There was a lady who threw garbage in the path of the prophet on a daily basis. One day, she didn't do it. The prophet went to inquire about her health, because he thought she might be sick. This lady ended up converting to Islam. So, that's how you respond to people who attack you, with forgiveness and with kindness. (Source)

On February 8, 2006, Amir Taheri, a reputable journalist who often explains Islam to the West, used the absolutist word 'never' in the context of chopping off the heads of satirists during Islam's founding.

The truth is that Islam has always had a sense of humor and has never called for chopping heads as the answer to satirists. Muhammad himself pardoned a famous Meccan poet who had lampooned him for more than a decade. (Source)

On February 9, 2006, a journalist for al—Jazeera, Abderrahim Foukara, appeared on the Charlie Rose Show saying about the same thing. After Muhammad conquered Mecca 'peacefully' (in early AD 630), he forgave a satirical poet. Never mind that twenty—eight Meccans died in the 'peaceful' conquest, after their city—weakened by eight years of Muslim raids on Meccan trade—was surrounded by 10,000 jihadists. [1]

In truth, however, while Muhammad forgave a poet and a singing girl right after his conquest of Mecca, he killed satirical poets more often than he forgave. Muhammad violently created a dead poets society of his own. He also killed non—poetic or ordinary mockers, and he used a poet to mock a tribe of Jews just before their conquest, slaughter, and enslavement.

These spokesmen for Islam presented only peaceful aspects. This is not full disclosure. This is wrong. The truth about all of Islam must be publicized, if we want to understand this religion fully. This article is intended to balance out the picture of Islam from the one that these spokespersons have presented.

The assassination of satirical poets

Once Muhammad reached Medina in AD 622 and gradually grew in military power, his tone and outlook changed. The following murders occur after the Hijrah.

(1) March 624: Al—Nadr bin al—Harith

Before Muhammad's Hijrah, he used to sit in the assembly and invite the Meccans to Allah, citing the Quran and warning them of God's punishment for mocking his prophets. A Meccan named Al—Nadr bin al—Harith would then follow him and speak about heroes and kings of Persia, saying, 'By God, Muhammad cannot tell a better story than I, and his talk is only of old fables which he has copied as I have.' On other days al—Nadr would interrupt Muhammad until the prophet silenced him.

It was Nadr's bad fortune to join Mecca's army, riding north to protect their caravan, which Muhammad attacked at the Battle of Badr in AD 624. It pitted about 320 Muslims against about 1,000 Meccans, near the north—south trade route following the Red Sea. The story—telling polytheist was captured, and on Muhammad's return journey back to Medina, Ali, Muhammad's cousin and son—in—law, at Muhammad's order, beheaded him, instead of getting some possible ransom money. He was one of two prisoners who were executed and not allowed to be ransomed by their clans—all because he harassed Muhammad and wrote poems and told stories critiquing him. [2]

(2) March 624: Uqbah bin Abu Muayt

A similar story as that of Nadr can be told about Uqba bin Abu Muayt. He too harassed and mocked Muhammad in Mecca and wrote derogatory verses about him. He too was captured during the Battle of Badr, and Muhammad ordered him to be executed. 'But who will look after my children, O Muhammad?' Uqba cried with anguish. 'Hell,' retorted the Prophet coldly. Then the sword of one of his followers cut through Uqba's neck.

After the prophet's victory at Badr, he was not always magnanimous. This passage finds him mocking the enemy dead in the middle of the night, as their bodies lie motionless in a pit:

. . . The apostle's companions heard him saying in the middle of the night, 'O people of the pit: O Utbah, O Shayba, O Ummayya, O Abu Jahl,' enumerating all who had been thrown in the pit, 'Have you found what God promises you is true? I have found that what my Lord promised me is true.' The Muslims said, 'Are you calling to dead bodies?' He answered: 'you cannot hear what I say better than they, but they cannot answer me. [3]

The reliable hadith collector and editor Bukhari confirms Ibn Ishaq's account.

These were the battles of Allah's Apostle (which he fought), and while mentioning (the Badr battle) he said, "While the corpses of the pagans were being thrown into the well, Allah's Apostle said (to them), 'Have you found what your Lord promised true?" 'Abdullah said, "Some of the Prophet's companions said, "O Allah's Apostle! You are addressing dead people.' Allah's Apostle replied, 'You do not hear what I am saying, better than they.' (Bukhari )

In this tradition the prophet is shown taunting the dead in a well, not a pit, and he seems to have done this in broad daylight. Maybe these are two different episodes in Ibn Ishaq and Bukhari; regardless, they convey the same unpleasant message. [4]

(3) March 624: Asma bint Marwan

She was a poetess who belonged to a tribe of Medinan pagans. She composed a poem blaming them for obeying a stranger (Muhammad) and for not taking the initiative to attack him by surprise. Perhaps in March 624, when the Allah—inspired Prophet heard what she had said, he asked, 'Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?' A member of her husband's tribe volunteered and crept into her house that night. She had five children, and the youngest was sleeping at her breast. The assassin gently removed the child, drew his sword, and plunged it into her, killing her in her sleep. [5]

(4) September 624: Kab bin al—Ashraf

Kab b. al—Ashraf had a mixed ancestry. His father came from a nomadic Arab tribe, but his mother was a Jew from the powerful al—Nadir tribe in Medina. He lived as a member of his mother's tribe. He heard about the Muslim victory at the battle of Badr, and he was disgusted, for he thought Muhammad the newcomer to Medina was a trouble—maker and divisive. Kab had the gift of poetry, and after the Battle of Badr he traveled down to Mecca, apparently stopping by Badr, witnessing the aftermath. Arriving in Mecca, he wrote a widely circulated poem, a hostile lament, over the dead of Mecca.

Angered by the poems and now able to strike back after the Battle of Badr, Muhammad had had enough. He asked, 'Who would rid me of [Kab]?' Five Muslims volunteered, one of whom was Kab's foster—brother named Abu Naila. They informed him, 'O apostle of God, we shall have to tell lies.' He answered, 'Say what you like, for you are free in the matter.'

After deceitfully gaining Kab's trust over time, a Muslim yelled to the four other murderers, 'Smite the enemy of God!' Though outnumbered, Kab mounted a strong defense, so their swords were ineffective. Finally, one of the conspirators remembered his dagger, stabbed Kab in the belly, and then bore it down until it reached his genitals, killing him.

They made it back to Muhammad. They saluted the prophet as he stood praying, and he came out to them. They told him that the mission was accomplished. Early Muslim historian Tabari (d. 923) reports that the five Muslim thugs severed Kab's head and brought it to Muhammad. [6]

(5) July—August 625: A one—eyed, unnamed Bedouin

In revenge for an ambush on some Muslim missionaries, Muhammad sent Amr bin Umayya and a companion to assassinate Abu Sufyan, a leader of the Meccans. This shows that the Prophet could get caught up in the cycle of violence that went on endlessly in seventh—century Arab culture. Umayyah failed in his attempt, and he had to flee under pursuit, hiding in a cave, murdering a man named Ibn Malik along the way. As the pursuit was dying down, a tall, one—eyed, unnamed Bedouin entered the cave, driving some sheep. Umayyah and the Bedouin introduced each other. After they settled down, the shepherd sang a simple two—line song in defiance of Muslims and Islam.

Unfortunately for this Bedouin, he was in the cave with a radical Muslim, who said: 'You will soon see!' The Bedouin fell asleep, snoring. Umayyah recounts what he did: . . . 'I went to him and killed him in the most dreadful way that anybody has ever been killed. I leaned over him, stuck the end of my bow into his good eye, and thrust it down until it came out of the back of his neck.' He fled back to Muhammad, who said, 'Well done!' The account ends: The prophet 'prayed for me [Umayyah] to be blessed.' [7]

(6) After January 630: One singing—girl

After Muhammad conquered Mecca in early AD 630, a conquest that saw some bloodshed of twenty—eight Meccans, he showed amnesty to the newly conquered. But on the list of those excluded from amnesty was not only Abdullah b. Katal, collector of legal alms, who had killed his slave for incompetence, apostatized from Islam, and took the money back to Mecca. But his two singing—girls who sang satirical verses about Muhammad, which Abdullah had composed, were also excluded from the list. He was killed, even though he was clinging to the curtain of the Kabah shrine. And one of the girls was killed, but the other ran away until she asked for pardon from Muhammad, who forgave her. [8]

(7) After February 630: close call for Kab bin Zuhayr

Confident with the victory over Mecca, Muhammad returned to Medina a hero and firmly in charge of the southwest of the Arabian Peninsula. In this context Muhammad nearly murdered another poet who satirized Muhammad and Muslims, Kab bin Zuhayr (here called Zuhayr to distinguish him from Kab bin al—Ashraf, above, no. 4). Zuhayr's brother wrote him that Muhammad had killed a number of satirical poets during his conquest of Mecca, but that the Prophet would forgive a poet who came to him in repentance, which really meant becoming a Muslim. His brother told him that the poets who were left had fled in all directions.

'If you have any use for your life, then come to the apostle quickly, for he does not kill anyone who comes to him in repentance,' wrote the brother, continuing: 'if you do not do that, then get to a safe place.'

Finding no way out, Zuhayr wrote a letter extolling Muhammad. Soon afterwards, he traveled up to Medina to ask for security as a Muslim. Muhammad was saying his morning prayers, and a friend took Zuhayr into Muhammad's presence. 'Would you accept him as such if he came to you?' his friend asked. The Prophet said he would.

As Zuhayr came into the Prophet's presence, one of the Ansars (helpers or native Medinans who helped Muhammad after his Hijrah) leaped upon Zuhayr and asked Muhammad if he could behead the enemy of God, for some of Zuhayr's verses mocked the Ansars, too. The apostle said to leave him alone, for Zuhayr was breaking free from his past. The implication is clear: if Muhammad had caught Zuhayr before his repentance, Muhammad would have allowed him to be beheaded. Either he converts or he dies—for writing derogatory poetry.

What is remarkable about the anecdote is how the morning prayer provides the setting for a Muslim leaping on a poet and threatening to cut his head off, as if this is an ordinary day and act. [9]

Murder of ordinary mockers

Two examples of murder demonstrate that Muhammad did not like mockery even by non—poets. Any ole insulter is vulnerable in original Islam.

(1) A blind man murders his slave—wife

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:

A blind man had a slave—mother who used to abuse the Prophet . . . and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet . . . and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it.

He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling, the man stood up.

He sat before the Prophet . . . and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.

Thereupon the Prophet . . . said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood. [10]

The last line of this hadith shows Muhammad not allowing even blood—wit (compensation for bloodshed) to be paid on her behalf. Apparently, she was worth nothing, even though she bore the blind man two sons.

(2) An unnamed man strangles an unnamed Jewish woman.

Narrated Ali ibn Abu Talib:

A Jewess used to abuse the Prophet . . . and disparage him. A man strangled her till she died. The Apostle of Allah . . . declared that no recompense was payable for her blood. (Abu Dawud)

This hadith communicates that a Jewish woman is worth nothing. In early Islamic sources, Jews too often appear as extra—bad. Who was killed? Who is a murderer? A Jew? That's no big deal. Of course. That's to be expected. So what else is new?

Is it any wonder why so many Muslims who are educated in their source documents hate Jews? How can Muhammad and his sacred texts tell them to stop?

Regardless, in both murder cases, no one was arrested or executed, like—for—like. No one was even scolded. The murderers were let go on the grounds that insulting the Prophet deserves death. The translator of Abu Dawud informs us that all Jews or any non—Muslims who insult the Prophet should also be killed (vol. 3, note 3800).

Muhammad uses a satirical poet

Muhammad is fresh off a victory against a coalition of 10,000 Meccans and their allies in AD 627. After they depart, the last remaining major tribe of Jews, the Qurayza, is left alone, without allies. During Muhammad's twenty—five—day siege of this tribe, which resulted in the slaughter of the men and pubescent boys and the wholesale enslavement of the women and children, he employed a poet to abuse them.

The Prophet said to Hassan, 'Abuse them (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e. supports you).' (Through another group of sub—narrators) Al—Bara bin Azib said, 'On the day of Quraiza's (besiege), Allah's Apostle said to Hassan bin Thabit, 'Abuse them (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e. supports you).'' (Bukhari)

This shows how valued poetry was in seventh—century Arabia. In the absence of mass media, gathering around and listening to poets was an opportunity to persuade, smear, mock, praise, and otherwise influence large numbers. Now that Muhammad has the power, he employed a satirical poet without fear of reprisal. In fact, he refers to the Jews as brothers of monkeys, citing a legend that he believed, namely, that God turned some disobedient Jews into apes. (see also Ibn Ishaq pp. 461—62).

Conclusion

While it is true that Muhammad forgave a satirical poet and a singing girl (see no. 7 in 'Assassination of satirical poets,' above), he murdered more than he forgave. Omitting the violent episodes in the Prophet's life, the spokespersons for Islam act irresponsibly in their television appearances. Possibly their strategy is to make Islam and its Prophet seem only peaceful and loving, perhaps so that the uninformed may be drawn to this religion or at least not be turned off by it.

However, aggressive Islam is on the march. The riots over the cartoons are only one symptom. The stakes are high. Thus, the peaceful spokespersons' partial presentation of Islam is misleading at best and dangerous at worse. When or if Islam gets a foothold in a region on the basis of 'peace and love,' what happens when the hard line and traditional (not to mention nonviolent and violent fanatics) Muslims come to the region later and impose all sorts of violent laws and policies and practices in the Quran and hadith? Honesty demands full historical and scriptural disclosure, even if it hurts.

Endnotes:

[1] Go here for more information, and scroll down to no. 3, looking for a critique of Karen Armstrong. The transcript is available by purchase only. Here is a video clip of the discussion between Foukara, Rose, and others.

[2] Source: Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, (trans. A. Guillaume, Oxford UP, 1955, 2004), pp. 136, 163, 181, 262, 308. Reputable historians today consider Ibn Ishaq to be a reliable source of early Islam, though they may disagree on his chronology and miraculous elements.

[3] Ibn Ishaq, p. 306

[4] Bukhari, Spoils of War (online source); Muslim nos. 4421, 4422, and 4424; These are parallels in Bukhari about taunting the dead: here and here. Ibn Ishaq, pp. 306—08. Muslim is also a reliable collector and editor of the hadith (records of the words and deeds of Muhammad outside of the Quran).

[5] Ibn Ishaq, pp. 675—76.

[6] Bukhari, Military Expeditions (online sources: here; see also the one below); this one and this one show Muhammad giving permission to his assassin to say anything, i.e. lie; Muslim no. 4436 ; Ibn Ishaq pp. 364—69 ; Tabari, The History of al—Tabari, Vol. 7, (trans. by M.V. McDonald and annotated by W. Montgomery Watt, SUNYP, 1987), pp. 94—98. Reputable historians today consider Tabari to be a reliable source of data on early Islam, though they may not agree on his chronology or miraculous elements.

[7] Tabari, vol. 7, pp. 149—50; A later editor incorporated some of Tabari's account into Ibn Ishaq's biography, pp. 674—75.

[8] Bukhari, Military Expeditions, (Online source) ; Ibn Ishaq, pp. 550—51.

[9] Ibn Ishaq, pp. 597—602. Some Muslim polemicists consider him to be unreliable mostly because he preserves so many traditions that portray Muhammad as violent. But here the prophet is forgiving, so now Ibn Ishaq's reliability cannot be doubted.

[10] Abu Dawud no. 4348 (he is another reliable hadith collector and editor)

Supplementary material

This article contrasts the reactions of Jesus and Muhammad when they were insulted and threatened.

This short analysis discusses the similarities between assassinations in early Islam and the ones today.

This analysis examines the many causes of assassinations of journalists and intellectuals in several Islamic countries, notably Algeria, but the analysis fails to go back to the ultimate source: Muhammad himself.

In November 2004, Theo Van Gogh was assassinated by a Muslim because the descendant of the brother of the famous artist had made a film that depicted a Muslim woman who was forced into an arranged marriage, abused by her husband, and raped by her uncle. These two articles examine the assassination of the filmmaker Theo van Gogh in light of the assassinations in early Islam.

James M. Arlandson can be reached at jamesmarlandson@hotmail.com.

Ali Sina on Islam

Islam Is The Real Source of Violence.

Human rights abuses happen in many countries, but never to the proportion and the magnitude of what is happening in Iran and other Islamic countries. In the last few years, and with no little thanks to the Islamic Revolution of Iran, I noticed that the major human right abuses are perpetrated in the name of religion. I became concerned for the plight of my people in Iran and her neighboring countries and decided to investigate the cause. I asked myself whether all this is because the gentle and peaceful message of Islam is misunderstood and whether there is a way to revive the pure Islam and save my country. It was in this quest that I realized, to my chagrin, that the human right abuses are not deviations from the true Islam but they ARE teachings of Islam.

I realized that in Islam, Man has no rights! All the rights are reserved for Allah. Man has only duties. Among his duties, he has to pray five times a day, believe in the religion of Allah and submit his will, thoughts and intelligence to him. Any independence from Allah, even at the level of thought is punishable by beating, imprisonment and death.

All the Islamic countries have signed the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights; despite that gross violations of human rights happen in almost all of them. The reason is – the laws of Quran and Sharia take precedence over the human rights whenever they are in conflict.

You are in violation of the laws of Quran and Sharia if you apostatize. Apostasy is the biggest sin that Allah cannot forgive. If you decide to turn your back to Islam, you must be killed. The prophet himself killed those who rejected him after they had accepted him and there are many verses in Quran from which the Islamic governments can get their guidelines in killing the apostates. (Q. 2:39,, 3:90-91, 4:89 , 9:66)

If you apostatize your marriage with your wife is annulled and your relationship with her is adulterous, which means not only you should be killed for heresy, your wife also should be stoned to death for adultery.

If you are a woman you cannot marry a non-Muslim, or both of you could face death.

If you belong to a religious minority; a Christian or a Jew, you may live but not before paying a penalty tax. This tax that is called Jizyah could be as high as half of your income. This was the amount that the Prophet exacted from the Jews of the Kheibar after he raided that town and killed many of their able men, taking as sex-slaves and maids their young and pretty women.

Torture in Islamic countries is common but it is also inspired by what the Prophet did. Muhammad is reported to have employed torture to force his victims reveal the information that he needed.

The oldest biography of Muhammad called the “Sirat Rasulallah On page 515, tells of Muhammad’s conquest of Kheibar. He ambushed this city without any provocation, and. “Kinana al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of Banu Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came (Tabari says “was brought”), to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, “Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?” He said, “Yes”. The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, “Torture him until you extract what he has.” So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud.”

One wonders why the same angle Gabriel who told the Prophet about the plot of the Banu Nadir against his life, a plot that no one heard of except the Prophet, thus giving him the excuse to exterminate that tribe and confiscate all their property, did not come to tell him where the treasure was hidden, forcing the impeccable and compassionate mercy of God amongst men to commit such horrendous act with another human being?

Muhammad himself raped the captured women in his raids. Rayhana and Safiya from the Jewish tribes of Banu Quraiza and Banu Nadir were the shares of the Prophet and were allotted to him before other Muslim warriors could get their share of their sex slaves.

Assassinations is the preferred Method of the Islamic regime of Iran. Hundreds of dissidents, whether inside of Iran or outside, have been eliminated in this way. Not surprisingly it was Muhammad who set the example. More than a dozen of people were assassinated by the followers of Muhammad and at his behest. One of them was a centenarian man called Abu Afak whose crime was to mock the Prophet in a poem. Another one was Asma Bint Marwan who composed a lyric cursing the Arabs for letting Muhammad get away with his crimes. The Prophet asked: “Who will get me rid of her”?. “Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, “You have helped God and His apostle, O Umayr!” When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, “Two goats won’t butt their heads about her”.

Asma was the mother of 5 small children. When her assassin came to take her life, she was asleep and her suckling baby next to her.

Every torture, every cruelty, every inhumanity perpetrated by Muslims in authority is inspired by the words and the deeds of the Prophet and can be found in Quran and hadith, the two sources of guidance for over a billion Muslims worldwide.

This is a long subject and one could write a book about it. Human rights violations cannot stop while Islam dominates the minds and the hearts of these people. The violence perpetrated by the Muslims is not limited to the Islamic countries. Although the Muslims are the primary victims of this cult, the West is not immune to Islamic terrorism. With the growth of the Muslim population in European and American countries, the inhabitants of these two continents could expect to see more terrorisms, World Trade Center style, and more loss of innocent lives.

The United States, Canada and all the European countries expend millions and millions of dollars to counter terrorism. But the sad reality is that Islamic terrorism is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. It is Islam that rears terrorists. You fight one terrorist group, ten more emerge from beneath the rock. “Fundamentalism is the poisonous branch of the poisonous tree of Islam” says Taslima Nasrin, the Bangali doctor who’s death is now decreed by the Muslim Ulama, “as long as the tree is standing these poisonous branches will keep shooting out”. To eliminate Islamic terrorism we have no option but to eliminate Islam.

Despite the anger and the threats of violence by the Muslim fundamentalists, Islam is a very vulnerable religion. The majority of Muslims are not aware of the inhumane teachings of Islam. The best part of them will leave Islam once they learn the bitter truth about it.

This is why I have dedicated my energy and life and have embarked on the self imposed mission to introduce the real Islam to the world, stop this insanity, bring common sense, call for unity of human kind, promote equality of the genders and advance reason and commonsense.

I have created the Rational Thinking site that is taking many hours of my life every day. I feel that I am responsible for those women who are murdered by their relatives in the barbaric and inexplicable ritual of honor killings, while their killers walk with impunity and even admired by the fanatic populace. I am responsible for the lost lives of the little children that are sold as slaves in Sudan by Muslim slave merchants, who find the justification of their actions in the words and the examples of the Prophet of Islam. I am responsible for the inhumane treatment of the women in the hands of their husbands because Muhammad told men to beat their wives in order to make them obedient (Q. 4: 34). I am responsible for the lives of those who are executed because they have changed their religion and became Baha’is, Christians or Ahmadis. I am responsible for the thousands of Indonesian Christians who are taken by Muslim Mujaheds and under the threat of decapitation are forced to convert and men and women undergo the inhumane ritual of genital mutilation as the sign of their initiation in there imposed religion. I am responsible for hundreds of lives of the intellectuals who have died in recent years in typical Islamic chain executions from which the Japanese Italian and Norwegian translators of Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses did not escape. And the Japanese interpreter was killed. I am responsible for the bombings in America, Europe and Israel by Muslim fanatics. I am responsible for the lost lives and the dismemberment of innocent bystanders that are killed in human bomb explosions in Israel, for the victims and the victimizers alike who are also victims of their stupidity and bigoted mindset. I am responsible…. Nay indeed we are all responsible to stop this insanity before millions of people lose their lives in a most unthinkable act of religious frenzy called Jihad.

In a world that has become so technologically advanced that even the poorest nations that cannot feed themselves boast having sophisticated nuclear and biological weapons, small misunderstandings can cause catastrophic results. Religion is, as it has always been, the biggest source of misunderstanding. For religion, people are ready to die and destroy everything else. Only a religious person would believe that he would go to paradise if he kills another person. Only a religious person has no regards for the lives he willingly destroys because their faith is not right. “Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.” –Pascal

It is this burning desire to save my fellow human being from the torments of a false doctrine that has made me dedicate my life in writing about the fallacies of Islam and exposing this most great obstacle in the road of human freedom.

My plan is to write a report/book linking all the human right abuses taking place in the name of Islam, whether in those countries that Muslims are in majority or where they are in minority to the Quran, and the Sunnah (recoded deeds) of the Prophet.

I realize that the conventional wisdom demands staying away from the founders of the religions and concentrate on the abusing followers. But I have a more maverick view than other freedom fighters and human rights activists. I am of the opinion that most human right abuses in Islamic countries are rooted in the antiquated and impractical belief of Islam and once Islam is weakened and is no more supported by the majority of educated Muslims, the ignorant masses will lose their stamina and Islam will be relegated as the belief of a bunch of old uneducated people easing its barbarity and loosening its fangs.

I understand that in this day and age it is politically incorrect to criticize the beliefs of someone else. But I do not agree with that! In my school of thought, PEOPLE are sacred beliefs are not. Beliefs must be scrutinized, analyzed, questioned, probed and if found wanting discarded. But people must be respected; their lives protected, their liberty guaranteed, their rights uphold and their freedom of thought and expression ensured.

One could write a book taking the examples of the human right abuses in the Islamic world and trace each and every one of them back to the Prophet himself. It was what he said and what he did that is inspiring the Muslim fundamentalists to destroy the statute of Buddha in Bamyan, to cut the fingers and hands of petty thieves, to lapidate women, to flagellate the intellectuals, to murder the apostates, to rape the women as the Pakistani Muslim soldiers did in its 1971 war with the Bangladeshi women and to enslave humans and sell them as they are doing in Sudan and even in Saudi Arabia as sex slaves.

I am convinced that to view the problem of violation of human rights in Islamic countries under any other light than what was mentioned in this article is missing the point and not addressing the real issue. Any time and recourse dedicated to expose this despotic president or that criminal Mullah is a waste of time. The problem is in the teachings of Quran and in the examples that its author set for Muslims to emulate. People must learn the truth, then no Mullah would be able to beguile them and no dictator can use religion as the pretext to rouse them in violence.

Ali Sina

April 2001

From hadiths of Abu Dawood

Book 38, Number 4345:
Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:
Abdullah ibn AbuSarh used to write (the revelation) for the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). Satan made him slip, and he joined the infidels. The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) commanded to kill him on the day of Conquest (of Mecca). Uthman ibn Affan sought protection for him. The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) gave him protection.

Also Victoria and other Muhammadans

Was Muhammad's paedophilic tendencies to be imitated or were meant for the 7th century only?

I am refering to Muhammad's rape of Aisha, Saffiya, Rayhana, Maria and Juwariyah.

Sayeed,

Let me help you out here as to why we decided to do a an Ann Coulter/Maureen Dowd on you. Here is a very small example:

You said - "The Arabic- which I'm well versed in given my Islamic background - is unambigious."

- a Muslim when asked, would say he or she is a Muslim.

- a former Muslim when asked, would say he or she was born a Muslim; or was raised a Muslim; or had Muslim parents; or is from a Muslim family.

- someone born and raised in the west who pursued Islamic studies in college would say he or she has an Islamic backround.

- A Muslim pursuing or has done Islamic courses would be more specific in the areas of his or her study e.g. Shariah law, kalam etc

As for Arabic, ask any native Arabic speaker and he or she would say, if he or she is from Algeria, say, that he or she would have difficulty understanding a fellow Arabic speaker from Yemen.

As for written Arabic, well, I will leave you to find out for yourself on the written Arabic form and structure as to why it causes some difficulties.

Muslims and Arabs have some reservations on your expertise in Islam and the Qur'an. Even believers can be sceptical.

? 4 Victoria and other Muhammadans.

Muhamamdans when prsented with numerous verses in the Koran exhorting Muhammadans to violence accuse the presenter of quoting out of context.

What is the context behind verse 4:34 in which Muhammad makes his arabic godling allah exhort Muhammadan husbands to beat their wives?

Reading on more of the above articles I think the whole idea of free speech is just another toilet paper. Just use it and flush it off. If this medium is created here for debate than I feel sensible reasonings are more approriate. I see fellows condemning the Islamic faith here just deplorable. One would assume we are all educated and providing intelligent and thought provoking ideas would be the day but rather insults and absolute nonsense is sprayed on Muslims. Might I enlighten all of you on the Sufis who are fervent muslims but the most tolerant lot of Muslims. The sufis are very religious and produce great Muslim music and to hear folks here saying nasty stuff about how Muslims treat women etc. is just deplorable. Come on guys away with the negatives let us all not get caught in all this hate litany. Remember wars do end, just as WW1, WW2 and the Vietnam war ended. There will be peace one day so save all the hatred. Love yourselfs and you will love all others, yes this is one thought of the sufis. By the way I am a Sikh.

-Secondly, Sayeed is more insistent on the literal text of the Qur'an, and to insist that it remains "unambigous" even when Muslim ulema, scholars and Muslims themselves leave them open for various interpretations and there are many interpretations.-

A wholly fallacious argument. My contention is neither the Quran nor Muhammad are sources for moral guidance in view of their extreme, objectionable teachings. I'm a secularist and am all for progressiveness. You just won't find it in Islam. The notion that somehow Muslims can still salvage something good of Islam without radically altering its original intent- something frowned upon by Muhammad and condemned by the Quran incidentally- is frivolous, one might as well argue there's a wide spectrum of opinion about Mein Kampf. Therefore one shouldn't stop teaching it to children. There's nothing left for any rational person who doesn't believe in oppressing women, and who opposes kiiling non-muslims, but to do away with it in Orwell's memory hole.

-By the way, fear of hell is a phenomenom among the lower income/poorer/lower classes and not quite well educated Muslims._

Such a claim not only goes contrary to the 200 plus verses of the Quran frightening people to fear the punishment of Allah , but also against the grain of common sense. For what plausible reason does a well educated Muslim woman spend her savings to travel many thousands of miles for the pilgrimage in Mecca to "purify" her sins other than dreadful terror that the cosmic dictator will roast her in hell? Why bother being a Muslim at all if not out of scared witless fear of the omniscient surveillance man (by the way doesn't the creator of the universe have anything better to do than count your sins?)

I shall leave you with the words of that most tolerant sage, Muhammad:

"I was ordered to fight the people until they believe in Allah and his messenger. I was sent by the sword proceeding the judgment day and my livelihood is in the shadow of my spear and humiliation and submission are on those who disobey me."

Best, Sayeed.

Good thing your non-believing friend Marvin didn't have an amputated foot. Those are hard to cure with prayer.

Jihaddist, I forgot to say peace. Sayeed and me are just exercising our right to free speach. Nothing personal from me for sure. Have a good trip.

Jihadist, I see it's time to drag Sayeed to the public square, folg him and then burn him at the stake.

You're not concerned about http://www.hoax-buster.org proving the Bible is bogus are you? To error is human. To error on purpose, terrorize children or adults with threats of hell garnered from sacred scriptures, literary hoaxes is a crime, in China.

Does the Bible protect the Quran, act as a buffer in your opinion? Were the supernatural beings from which the prophet Muhammad got his prophecy really from God or YKW? Is Allah almighty? Could you call for Allah and be answered by some other supernatural being? Did God or Devil inspire 9-11-2001?

Simple question: How sure are you the Quran is God's and not Devil's word? Sayeed and me, we don't have that problem and Mr Patel doesn't make it a problem.

I think I prefer the Wash Post as it was before it started this faith and religion section. As I read all the articles and the replies to the authors of the articles I cannot but see how some of the replies are, some good and some well....! With free speech sometimes we all as humans just blurt out anything even without thinking if it is pleasant. Either way religion is a private matter for each individual or even the atheist.

Hello Victoria,

I see that Nafi came by. Has some time out from business for fun here:)

Did you see how Sayeed used words like "apologist" when we offer another view, another perspective? He is parroting the classic Orientalists and others who use that term to deliberately slam Muslims into defensiveness on their faith, and to say our belief is invalid. We know that old trick to make us shut up, recoil, repent and roll over for colonization of lands and minds. (I want him to come back and say we are being defensive on that statement, and not being logical and to look at the facts etc about Islam)

And Sayeed in saying, "The Arabic- which I'm well versed in given my Islamic background - is unambigious."

Firstly, he did exactly say he speaks Arabic or Arabic is his mother tongue. He only says he is well versed with it. All Muslims knows Arabic from reading the Qur'an whether they understood it or otherwise, but now, there are approximations of the Qur'anic text already translated.

Secondly, Sayeed is more insistent on the literal text of the Qur'an, and to insist that it remains "unambigous" even when Muslim ulema, scholars and Muslims themselves leave them open for various interpretations and there are many interpretations.(I want him to come back and and quote something specific. He quotes from the Qur'an and Hadiths and then spouts western writers-thinkers' works and premises)

We have an interesting specie here for study, a dogmatic atheist about other faiths - one insisting that they should be and remain in a certain way as he sees them. That their belief and reason to remain believers is driven by fear of hell. That they should be reading the Qur'an literally and assertions that all Muslims do so.

So, in spite of it all, non-believers also need find others like them for groupthink and group support. Nothing wrong with that, and all the best to Sayeed and to continue to tell them what they need to hear to reassure them, to validate their beliefs and assumptions based on "facts" about any faith and their believers.

I believe Sayeed said before his family still are living as Muslims because they fear hell. I hope he have had "liberated" them from fear of God and hell. By the way, fear of hell is a phenomenom among the lower income/poorer/lower classes and not quite well educated Muslims. That is why we must make sure they all get access to education and to focus on other aspects of Islam - social justice, justice, communal peace and individual dignity.

Sayeed may not have known this, but the niqab was adopted by upper class Muslim women from the Byzantine ladies as a mark of separation and status. And Islam was spread first among the elites before filtering down to the masses. The Islamic movements from Africa to Asia was driven by the middle class and upward educated groups. Many are educated in the west too. (I want him to come back to say religion is a means of control by the powerful over the masses, never mind other factors and forces at work)

Go ahead, call me an apologist who spin and spurn. At least I am original and don't rely on quotes by others or to provide link to other sites, unlike some intellectual "supreme beings" who call themselves rational atheists or true blue inerrant believers.

Best regards and salaam as always

Mr. Patel,
That was a wonderful story about your Mother and Jewish friend. But if your friend did not know your Mother and you...do you think that Jew would be so happy to recieve Muslim prayers, or visa versa?

You talk about interfaith prayers...are there any Wiccans or Pagans of any flavor part of your interfaith group?

In Wicca we do not just pray for folks..it is a manipulation of others, which is not allowed. We ask first, unless we know for a certainty that our prayers are welcome. There is also a deep an yawning chasm between who we are, and who people think we are. So it's best not to push our prayers, where they might be feared.

I believe that all prayers that come from the careing heart works...as love and faith works wonders.

Blessings,

DW - no apology necessary. Everything you calim in the name of God fits Devil equally well and many times a lot better.

There are so many religions because priests and those who flunked the priesthood noticed the collection plate with the money going to the bishops and on to the pope. In mafia language, protestants "went into business for themselves." Mafia tactics fit many historical religious situations equally well as their lingo.

You PRETEND to know all about what God wants. Again I ask: what is your source of information about what God wants? The Bible is a PROVED HOAX. http://www.hoax-buster.org page 2. Cain killing Able has a sound written historical basis.

Graduates of Bible colleges are more ignorant in real knowledge than before they enrolled if they beleive what they claim to believe. Learning and believing lies makes the individual more ignorant and never smarter, smart asses sometimes no doubt. We have no way of knowing for sure you are anyone actually believes that which is claimed.

So what is your source of all that knowledge about what God wants. We need to know before it returns to what God DEMANDS and God's agents, ministers help God out making sure God's will is done. That scenario seems to be steam rolling ahead at this time.

CAN EVERYBODY PRAY FOR GOD TO COME AND FINISH WITH SATAN'S WORK. UNITY, GOOD WILL, A CLEAN LIFE, AND LOVE. ASK GOD FOR BLESSINGS FOR EVERYONE.

GOD BLESS

BTW...To all who might question why Christianity has so many different 'religions'. We must always be objective about this too. It is certainly and most emphatically not a 'God flaw'. Rather, consider human beings with regard to a prominent company that has over 30 flavors of ice cream. Have we all found ourselves happy with just one flavor? Is the correlation, in regard to religion, God's fault..especially when you consider mankinds decisions from the very beginning?

Post note: I realize BGONE was basically referring to the Quran with regard to authorized violence. My apology, my intent was to validate that and then comment on a Bible perspective

The God 'authorizations', referred to by BGONE, on things such as violence (ie wars, etc)in the bible, are historical accounts, many of which include God's involvment, at His discretion, with human affairs. Being historical accounts, and essential to completeness of biblical account, let alone showing the ways mankind has chosen, the 'authorizations' mentioned must be considered objectively along with the facts that 1) mankind has basically rejected God since Eden 2) God has a purpose, regardless of decisions human beings make and 3) God alone has the perogative to give life and allow life to be taken. The only lives God will 'take' will be of those, at the day of judgement, who wish not to really know God and pursue what He has in store for the fulfillment of mankinds purpose here on this earth. We cannot presume that God enjoys the way humans take each other's lives in war. The first account of such was long before wars came about, between two brothers, one being jealous. He stands back, for the most part, as a loving human father would for a stubborn child..sometimes seeing that the child just doesnt get it. How many times do we see/perceive/know that a loving parent sometime says 'I want them to do well, but if they want to learn the hard way...so be it.'

So? What if prayer does bring us together? Is the article trying to say something about prayer or about religion per se?

Touching piece of humanity though it may be, does the author really believe that the story demonstrates in any way that without the religious traditions that prescribed the actual words the various well-meaning protagonists were mumbling, that they wouldn't care? That they would have no sense of compassion? Or perhaps that even if they did have the compassion that they would be incapable of showing it for the simple fact that nobody wrote the religious script for them?

This story merely shows humans being humans - the fact that they were making religious type noises at the time is utterly irrelevant (and the ecumenical dimension is simply a juvenile attempt to demonstrate an absence of conflict between religious traditions and deftly brush over the fact that the traditions are designedly divisive). The implications that they would be unwilling or incapable of being human without having those religious noises to make is frankly obscene, and sadly typical of those desperate to take credit for what is a wholly natural human trait in the name of whichever brand of religion they favour.

Mr. Patel,

If your sick nonbelieving friend had been asked ahead of time if it was all right for others to pray for him, and if he had said yes, that would be fine.

Those who pray for a nonbeliever, without seeking his approval in advance, however, are merely officious intermeddlers, who, more likely than not, are principally seeking their own psychic satisfaction in a difficult situation.

They may even be trying to curry favor with their deity, like those Catholic and other Christian nurses who have surreptitiously baptized the newborns of nonbelieving parents.

So, to answer the headline of your essay's question, "CAN PRAYER BRING US TOGETHER?", the answer is "NO", unless all involved want the prayer to be spoken.

Otherwise the prayer is an aggressive and gratuitous insult to the nonbeliever. It's saying, "In your distress we know better than you".

SALAAMS AGAIN NAFI HAPPY TO SEE YOU FLY IN HERES WHEN YOU DO-

OK SAYEED-
WHAT ABOUT DARABA?

Nafi Sahgem

you write:

"I don't think Sayeed speaks or writes Arabic either, or he would have known that even till today, Arabic speaking ulema still have discourses and differences on the wording and meaning of the Qur'an. Not to mention interpretations."

To suggest that by "kill", "subjugate", and other less than peaceful instructions to mistreat non-muslims, is just Muhammad's figurative way of saying "Love thy neighbour and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you" is an insult to our intelligence. The Arabic- which I'm well versed in given my Islamic background - is unambigious.

There's nothing nuanced, however much Islamic apologists want to spin it, about an explicit order to "kill", "subjugate", "enslave", "beat" etc, all of which are replete in the Quran and Hadith.

I challenge you to name just TWO credible Islamic scholars who you claim repudiate the grotesque violence which permeates Islamic literature. You won't find no such scholars (not in the mainstream at least) because they're virtually non-existent (probably killed for heresy by some Muslim authority or other).

Best, Sayeed.

Hello Victoria,

Is that you? The same one I read before in the one and only thread I read in On Faith several weeks ago? Must be. Good to see you here. And quite persistent too I see.

This Sayeed fellow seems to quote a lot from the Hadith and is more into their literal readings and interpretations of the Qur'an than contemporary Muslim thinkers, writers, scholars and ulema in Muslim countries. Even there, there is no agreement on the nuances.

Well, I suppose one has to make a justification as to not only why one don't believe anymore, but to insist that one is a Muslim reformer or to hope for Muslim reform and that one is really progressive and forward for not being a Muslim or to not believe in God.

By the way, there are now deragotary terms such as "native informers" and "self-hating Muslims" hurled at former Muslims living in the west. I feel sorry for them. No a single thing they said is held as credible by Muslims who thinks that they are like Salman Rushdie. Some Muslims consider that they are so desperate for acceptance and admiration in their adopted societies that they are more white than the Caucasians (if they are not), and more Christian than the Christians in what they say about Muslims.

It is terrible, this gap and mutual apathy between Muslims and non-Muslims. I don't think Sayeed speaks or writes Arabic either, or he would have known that even till today, Arabic speaking ulema still have discourses and differences on the wording and meaning of the Qur'an. Not to mention interpretations. That is why the Qur'an tranlated from Arabic into other languages are not regarded as translations, but rather as approximations of the Qur'anic text.

Bye again Victoria. Good to "see" you again. This On Faith threads is not pleasant for Muslims to be in. I see there is still many postings condemning Muslims, Islam and the Prophet. I never realized how much they hated us until I read the postings here. So, I get out of places where I am hated for just being a Muslim.

warmest regards and peace be with you.

Nafi Sahgem

BGONE and SAYEED

Shall we leave you two alone here while you conduct a lovey-dovey relationship?

One would hope this common little tale of daily humanity might well have taken place without any referrence to anyone's beliefs or the fairy tales of worship.

Thank you for reminding me, yet again, that humanity transcends all religious worship and not the reverse.

SAYEED, I like your separation of Victoria from that which s/he seems to believe. I've noticed the same problem, the separation of obviously good people being mislead from the misleaders. People tend to take the lies of the liars they believe being revealed as saying they are the liars.

Victoria, all, you are not the liars. You are the victims of the lie and being urged to reconsider. In America it's perfectly alright to believe the lie, now take our president for example. He believed the NIE report. Same thing as believing sacred scriptures.

Ask yourself a simple question: who wrote the sacred scriptures? Then simply add: did he/they have a motive to lie? Finally: do the sacred scriptures stop people from hurting each orther or cause people to hurt each other?

Look them, sacred scriptures over again. They are not above question. The Bible is a PROVED hoax. How about the Quran? Is it REALLY God's word or the words of people with personal gain in mind? Victoria, Sayeed is simply asking if God can be so ambigious, cruel hearted, predjudice, sexists and more as stated in the Quran?

Praying to the Gods of sacred scriptures reinforces FAITH in sacred scriptures and not necessarily faith in God. Be carefull that your faith is in God and not the Quran. They are two radically different faiths. Faith in God is innocent while faith in "the Quran is God's word" seems to be leading the world to disaster.

sayeed i am sure now you know nothing of the arabic language- or are being misleading on purpose.

i have posted at length and ad nauseum on several of these subjects and more- i havent the inclination or time to retrieve them-

if you actually believe this- go ahead- because your education is too ingrained for me to contend with-

if your mind is clearly made up- refutations or endless posts will do nothing to change your mind-

these are simple arguments that i have already had-

i have nothing to prove to anyone- only myself and i am satisfied

VICTORIA

Never have I heard a greater cop-out than the oft-repeated “out of context”.

If as you claim the intolerance of the Quran pertain only to a specific period of hostilities between Muslims and non-Muslims, why therefore were they not retracted or abrogated as is usually the case for verses with no more relevance? Rather it’s still there in all its poisonous venom, being taught to generations of impressionable youngsters, to inspire hate of the infidel and non-muslims.

It forever strikes me as curious when women are the apologists for Islam given Muhammad didn’t think too highly of the female sex. Consider his saying: "I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers are women. " (Book of Sahih Bukahri Vol. 1:28, 301)

Morever Women, according to Muhammad, are also deficient in intelligence. Speaking with a woman who came to him he says: “Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half that of a man?" The women said, "yes," He said, "This is because of the deficiency of the woman's mind. " (Book of Sahih Bukahri Vol. 3:826)

This also explains the Quranic injunction that the testimony of a woman counts for half of a man’s testimony. (Quran 2:282).

He also considered women as omen: " Bad omen is in the woman, the house and the horse." (sahih Bukahri Vol. 7:30)

And that's to say nothing of wife-beating, polygamy and surbodination of women to her spouse.

I however don't hold you in such low regard. I respect you as intelligent, dignified and my equal. I don't however respect backward Islamic beleifs.

VICTORIA

Never have I heard a greater cop-out than the oft-repeated “out of context”.

If as you claim the intolerance of the Quran pertain only to a specific period of hostilities between Muslims and non-Muslims, why therefore were they not retracted or abrogated as is usually the case for verses with no more relevance? Rather it’s still there in all its poisonous venom, being taught to generations of impressionable youngsters, to inspire hate of the infidel and non-muslims.

It forever strikes me as curious when women are the apologists for Islam given Muhammad didn’t think too highly of the female sex. Consider his saying: "I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers are women. " (Book of sahih Bukahri Vol. 1:28, 301)

This also explains the Quranic injunction that the testimony of a woman counts for half of a man’s testimony. (Quran 2:282).

Morever Women, according to Muhammad, are also deficient in intelligence. Speaking with a woman who came to him he says: “Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half that of a man?" The women said, "yes," He said, "This is because of the deficiency of the woman's mind. " (Book of Sahih Bukahri Vol. 3:826)

He also considered women as omen: " Bad omen is in the woman, the house and the horse." (sahih Bukahri Vol. 7:30)

And that's to say nothing of wife-beating, polygamy and surbodination of women to her spouse.

I however don't hold you in such low regard. I respect you as intelligent, dignified and my equal. I don't however respect backward Islamic beleifs.

sayeed if you calim to be familiar with the quran- then you should know better than to quote soemthing form the quran and claim it is representative- this was in reference to SPOECIFIC christians and jews who were breaking treaties in a particular historic point in time- either you know this and are deliberately misleading people- or you are not who you claim to be.

Mr. PAtel is representaitve of islam and a welcome force in chicago where he lives and does much to create understanding between people of different faiths-

as he is living his religion in a righteous and beautiful way- is it not possible that you are taking something out of context?

and i dont know what that hadeeth is but its terrible- possibly you know something that i dont about it- but your intentions seem verging on disrespectful to say the least-

in your zeal to discredit islam - you should address it more to people like me who are not so knowlegeable-

ok peace then sayeed as you say its all about intentions

BGONE

I wish liberal interpretations of religion, in this case Islam, were its saving grace. But I care about original intent, and taking people at their word. Exactly what other interpretation other than sheer intolerance and persecution of non-muslims one can derive from the previous cited verses I don't know (maybe Mr. Patel can enlighten us). Perhaps Hitler's venemous tirades about Jews were not to be so interpreted.

It's really time secularists stop making excuses for Islam and expose it for the divisive menace it surely is.

I do like your idea of a "clean up the Quran" campaign" to get Muslims "a new book with a little less ambiguity", although I don't think there's much ambiguity in the Quran as to how Muslims should treat others. It's pretty clear cut.

A witty idea suggested by Hitchens is just that. Just as Thomas Jefferson excised all that was inappropriate from his Bible leaving him only with Jesus's reasonble teachings, Muslims ought to expunge from their scripture all that is demeaning and barbaric. Perhaps Mr. Patel will oblige.

I shall wait for my copy of the new and improved Jefforsonian Quran. What say you Mr. Patel? Would you like my home address?

Kind regards.

Mr Patel, your intentions are honorable so I can only wish you well. I think the whole notion of religion is screwy, however. It's far better to have Muslims and Jews getting along with each other and even praying for each other. Good luck with what you are doing if I read that correctly.

SAYEED, I don't know much about the Quran but the news says there's something wrong somewhere. Obviously Mr Patel and his family don't interpret it as your quotes surely allow it to be interpreted. The Quran is probably like the Bible with as many different interpreatation as there are readers. Congratulations to you on breaking the hold faith has on people's minds. You're welcome in my world anytime and so is Mr Patel.

I'm one of many millions of Americans that KNOW the Bible is a hoax and strongly suspect all sacred scriptures written by folks that see and/or hear things the rest of us miss. Two of those that come to mind are the Quran and the Book of Mormon. Maybe Mr Patel could lead a "clean up the Quran" campaign and get Muslims a new book with a little less ambiguity and for everyone's G/gods sake write the G/god authorized/required violence out.

A heart-warming tale of love and compassion. But not exactly the way of Muhammad is it Mr. patel?

Consider the following verse from the Quran:

"O you who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends: They are but friends to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust." (5:51)

Your family, loving as I'm sure they are, are not exactly going by the Quran, when fraternising with a Jewish man.

Consider also the less than tolerant instruction of Muhammad to Muslims as to how best deal with non-muslims:

"Do not greet the Jews and the Christians before they greet you; and when you meet any one of them on the road, force him to go to the narrowest part of it." (Book of Sahih Muslim)

As an ex-Muslim I applaud your tolerant spirit toward people of different faiths, but I entreat you kind sir, let's not pretend it's inspired by either the Quran or Muhammad himself. A Muslim true to his scripture wouldn't say "hello" to a non-Muslim Jew, still less invite him for a cordial tea and pray for his health.

Again, your warm relationship with the professor is great, but hardly Islamic.

Kind regards.

One night a 100 year old atheist knocked on the door of a Rabbi asking for food and shelter for the night and was let in. During meal the atheist denied belief in a god, angering the Rabbi. The Rabbi ordered him out of his home into the cold night. God then asked the Rabbi, "why did you kick the man out of your house?" and the Rabbi said, "Lord, he denied you and I wont deal with someone like that". The Lord then said, "Rabbi, I've dealt with him for 100 years! Can't you deal with him for one night?". The Rabbi then went and brought him back.