yasser,
***danish cartoons (and koran desecration):
you said,
”On the Danish Cartoons thing, its regeretable that all those deaths occured (Most of them occured in one country, Nigeria!). But i've said it before on these blogs, it was an astutely timed provocation...we were hearing horrible stories from Abu Gharaib...”

uh...sorry...no excuse. that’s like blaming the girl for rape because she was dressed sexily...

abu gharaib was horrible. i apologize 1000 more times. (though i just heard news recently of some pakistani torture scandal...) there’s taking religion seriously, and there’s being childishly hyper-sensitive and obsessive about it. a rational person would say, “how is my god harmed by (a non-believer, no less!) flushing a piece of paper with ink on it down the toilet?” how fragile is your god that that bothers you? in the united states we have public funding for pictures of jesus soaked in urine... people complain about it, but that’s freedom of speech and separation of church and state in action.

have you heard of “the onion”? it’s a sometimes-hilarious parody newspaper. they’ll have articles like an interview with post-9/11 muhammad atta, in hell. atta is “quoted” as being surprised to find himself in hell, and saying how he thought there’d be virgins etc...awaiting him in heaven. anyway, the muslim reaction to the Danish cartoons is straight out of the onion. the idea that cartoons depicting islam as a violent religion would be met with...well...violent muslim protests is just too funny. muslims proved the cartoons right! lighten up! it’s just a joke. and it’s only funny if there’s a grain of truth. the muslim reaction made those cartoons even funnier...

***islamabused women:
i said,
“islamabused” women would be victims of “scourging” (koran 4:34) and other misogynistic verses, practices and rituals".

you said,
”...You said Scourging?? in Pakistan?? I though you had been to Pakistan? Ask your dad if you were too young to remember. When was the last time a woman was whiplashed in Pakistan? We dont give such punishments dude!~ You're wrong here as well just as with everyother thing.”

i don’t mean government-sanctioned scourging. i mean koran-sanctioned scourging in the privacy of one’s own home. we can talk about how hard a man is allowed to hit a woman (islamic scholars have...), but do we really want to go there? the fact is wife-beating is in the koran. edhi expends great energy housing, protecting and legally defending islamabused women. hopefully, most muslim men are nice about it, don’t exercise their god-given right to scourge, behave respectfully, and NEVER beat their wives. but, should they choose to scourge, they can point to v4:34. sure, women are beaten in “western culture”, but we can’t point to scripture for justification. and, how many husbands can a wife have in islam?

again, i refer you to this poll for pakistani’s level of religious tolerance:
http://reasonweekly.com/religion/78-of-pakistanis-support-death-penalty-for-apostasy-83-support-stoning-adulterers
and this study on domestic violence in pakistan:
http://www.hrcp-web.org/ReportsDisplay.aspx?id=3

yasser,
***an islamic UDHR:
you said,
”Yes the OIC has demanded their version of UDHR. Whats wrong with that? In any democratic dispensation you have the right to demand what you believe is correct with justifiable means. If theirs ever a voting on that the OIC would probably lose considering only fifth of the countries are muslim.”

human rights should not be a majority-rules issue. are you saying if there were enough muslim countries that would make it moral to subject the rest of us to islamic laws? what if the majority wants something immoral like, say, lynching black people in alabama or banning books? a democracy needs a neutral human rights constitution to protects itself from itself... you know, tyranny of the majority and all that.

you said,
sudan’s public order act was ”Just as wrong as the Christian Majority French Nation's decree that any girl who covers her head wont be allowed to study in French educational Institutions (isn't that extremism of the other end??).”

yes, tyranny of the majority. does this french decree ban “headscarves” or covering the face? i think there’s a big difference there.

***america – the christian nation!?:
you said,
”Can you say Christianity plays absolutely no role in governing in predominantly Christian countries? The separation of Church and state is a fancy word. The progenitor of your constitutions and your laws is indeed the Bible.”

well, if by “role” you mean our national holidays are christmas and easter, then, ok, there’s a christian influence on laws. if you mean that tolerance, individual rights (including freedom of religion) and democracy are “christian principles”, then i beg to differ. please don’t think of those enlightenment ideas as “christian” or “biblical”. you moderate muslims have to teach those crazy militants that embracing those ideas isn’t “unislamic”. they can’t think “separation of church and state” is a christian idea. and it’s not.

where the bible imagines one god, the declaration of independence welcomes all gods. the u.s. constitution was the first constitution to PREVENT jesus (or any god) from making society’s rules. where the first amendment guarantees freedom of religion, the first commandment prohibits it. thomas jefferson et. al. fought hard to keep jesus (any god) out of the constitution. the fact that we ARE NOT a christian nation is what was revolutionary about america.

yasser,
***apostasy laws:
you said,
”And pray tell when was the last stoning to death for apostacy that happened in any country?”

agreed that stoning for apostasy is not LEGAL today, but MOST people in pakistan would impose some form of death penalty for apostasy if given the chance. stoning would be saved for adultery...
http://reasonweekly.com/religion/78-of-pakistanis-support-death-penalty-for-apostasy-83-support-stoning-adulterers

and apparently, historically, islamic scholars have determined that beheading is the islamic way. i suppose that’s somehow more humane than stoning... but can you agree that “big city” laws don’t usually apply to “country muslims”? i.e., that justice is local? that “tribal elders” use Islamic laws to decide cases – whether or not that’s official government policy?

the very fact that there have been TRIALS for apostasy recently in egypt, afghanistan and iran says enough. the very idea that there would be ANY laws about apostasy is unenlightened. legal distinctions aside, islamic vigilantes these days seem to prefer stabbing.... and famous apostates must live in exile, like nazi war criminals or something.... again, it’s islamic laws being applied to society at large.

references for egypt, afghanistan, iran, stabbings and exiled apostates...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam

***religious freedom:
i said,
“almost by definition, religious freedom for the 600,000,000+ people in these countries is impossible.”

and you said,
”Impossibel? Huh? How did you endup with that Statistic? Can you back it up with actual proof? You're pretty lax with these absolute words you use Walter.”

if you add the populations of the countries designated “islamic” (iran etc...) and the countries with “islam” as the “national religion”, you get over 600,000,000 people living in countries with some degree of governmental religious favoritism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_majority_countries
by enlightened standards, this is not freedom of religion. muslims may think they’re being enlightened and magnanimous by “allowing” non-muslims to live in muslim society. and maybe by pre-enlightenment standards they are. jefferson, madison et. al. put an end to all that with their secular constitution. only in a SECULAR SOCIETY can there be true FREEDOM OF RELIGION. that’s the big idea islam needs to embrace.

PART II

***western media bias and bad things christians do:

Can I suggest to you that you mostly employ double standards in all your posts regarding Islam? You attribute all the crimes muslims perpetrate to their religion calling them Islamic crimes even though they do not have anything to do with Islam. Yet when it comes to Christians and Jews perpetrating these crimes you would always detach their religion. Btw the Rwandan genocide did have a Christian connection. The Christian missionaries also contributed in riling up tensions between the two tribes. In order to win more converts the told the Tutsi's they were a superior tribe to the Hutu's. Some missionaries were also charged by the commission that was setup to investigate this genocide.

With regards to the rape cases in US, I was responding to what you said in your post that you had never seen anyone except a muslim rape a girl for being on a date with him. I believe thats plain wrong. Most dates do end up with sex and there have been many cases in US of rape and gang rapes by boyfriends~!

***iraq:

Thank you for your honest comment. Mistakes have been made on both sides. Hopefully the things are getting better as it seems to be. I can tell you, most muslims are ready to look beyond Iraq and co-exist with US and Europe if there's a visible shift in Policy towards the occupied muslim countries and if you start dealing justly with regards to the other big issue in the ME i.e Israel/Palestine. We do have spoilers who only thrive when there's a showdown between Islam and the West and they'll attempt to create hurdles. Im sure you have those kinds in your country too. I am hoping they have been exposed enough in this disastrous decade we've had and that we'll learn to ignore them.

Its been good to hear from you after a while~! Hope to hear from you soon. If not here than maybe on another blog.

Hi Walter~!

The test worked so I guess we can continue to exchange posts for as long as it works on this thread~!

***lashing as penalty for being raped for adultery:

Walter, If you remember my post, I said that I wouldn't defend the indefensible. The Saudi's do a lot of things that are revolting to even me as a Muslim. I have expressed my disgust at them many a times in these blogs. But you are wrong in saying that the punishment was correct implementation of the Islamic Law. Islam does want to keep sexual relations between man and woman a sacred act reserved for only husband and wife. I think in this regard we aren't much different from Christians or Jews. So to maintain that order, Islam does suggest some remedies on how to prevent muslims from straying from the righteous path. Yes there's a severe punishment for indulging in extra-marital sex in Islam, but to say that Islam denies women the right to go out and drive or work or have a good time is plain falsehood. And to say that these ideas are followed by all Muslims is plain wrong. We elect women as our leaders. What bigger example can I give you? When was the last time USA elected a woman to be their leader? Switzerland has been in the news for some laws that they have made against muslims regarding us challenging their enlightened democratic way of life by building mosques, and I read an interesting information about this country which considers itself the birthplace of democracy. Women weren’t even allowed to vote till 1971! And yet when I look at the history of my country, forever getting bashed for our perceived attitudes towards women, we had a female Presidential Candidate (Fatima Jinnah, you can look her up on wiki) way back in the 60's and she would have won that election hands down and become the first elected female head of state anywhere. She was such a revered figure and it was only through mass rigging that the incumbent military dictator was able turn the public opinion falsely in his favor.

***war on islam?:

You're pretty lax with your jokes Walter. And yes it wasn't really funny. But it has been suggested in a serious manner many a times on Fox news by hatemongering tele evangelists and so called experts. And believe me having the arsenal doesn't mean you can destroy your opponent. You had the arsenal to destroy Soviets and the Communist bloc as well. Why didn't you destroy them? Yea you did destroy the two Japanese cities but you had comfort in the knowledge that they Japanese had no way of responding to such a vicious attack. And when you attack a country and indulge in wholesale murder of its populace through "Shock and Awe" the lines of moderate and fanatic muslims always get blurred.

test

yasser,
***iraq:
you said,
” Do you remember that the first things Americans did after they invaded Iraq was disbanding all Baath Party Administration officials, Police Force and Army! Can you imagine their utter hieght of idiocy? They truly believed they would be garlanded in Baghadad after their "shock and awe" takeover. Rumsfeld dismissed calls for going with a bigger to take control of the country under the same illusion.”

stupid. stupid. stupid. rumsfeld et. al. TOTALLY BLEW IT. should have secured all the ministries (not just oil) and had hundreds of thousands more troops as peace keepers. rumsfeld wanted to “go light” so the public wouldn’t “feel any pain” from rumsfeld et. al.’s little escapade. he ignored long-standing off-the-shelf iraq war plans designed to deal with all the problems that occurred. stupid. stupid. stupid.

in the beginning it WAS shock and awe. it WAS a totally awesome march to bagdad...and then nothing....like they didn’t even think about the aftermath. ugh... the worst part is they WERE greeted with candy as liberators etc.... it was a magic moment when that statue fell. even though the entire reason for the invasion was faked, once it had happened it was a great opportunity for america to show ourselves helping ordinary muslims living under oppression. those iraqis were truly glad to have saddam gone and were truly thankful. ugh.... everything we did after the statue fell was so stupid of us.... nonetheless, iraqis could have united instead of dividing.

re george bush’s idiocy: i understand that it was only 2 months before going into iraq (while already at war in afghanistan!), that bush learned that there are “sunnis” and “shiites”....
________________________________________

more as time permits. you can begin commenting, if you like. remember, if this thread "times out" we'll meet up on susan's newest and pick a new place. "see" ya.

yasser,
***war on islam?:
i said,
"now, if we were at war with islam, we could easily destroy mecca, and all the muslims in the 57 majority-muslim countries"

and you said,
”Really Walter, you usually seem like a congenial, knowledgeable man until you come with these gems that are right out of your "Twilight Zone" Reverend's mouth. How easy is it to kill 1.2 billion people and destroy 57 countries? Do you even understand the amount of Atomic Bombs and Nuclear Arsenal it would take?”

i guess i’m not as funny as i think i am. i was not seriously suggesting destroying those 57 countries – though we DO have the arsenal to do it, many times over. my point was that we’re not at war with all muslims, just the ones who practice violent “lesser” jihad...

***western media bias and bad things christians do:
rwanda genocide: it is absolutely horrible human rights behavior. but the motivating factor here is not religious. the bad guys happen to be christian, but that’s not what it’s all about. this is tribal. south american drug dealers don’t kill for catholic reasons. u.s. rapists don’t “do it” for religious reasons. point taken on bosnia – bosnia IS a good example of christians behaving badly for religious reasons. it was a great opportunity for america to show we care about human rights – even for muslims... regarding rape statics in the u.s. vs. the “muslim world”, i suspect reporting is much higher in the u.s.

hello yasser (and any other moderate muslims out there),

***lashing as penalty for being raped for adultery:
you said,
”The fact is she isn't just being punished for being raped.”

how crazy is it that we need to make that distinction? being raped was only part of her “crimes”...

”There is a law in Saudi that an adult woman shouldn't go out without a male consort. So this woman not only broke that law but was also found guilty of hitch-hiking and going to an unknown persons home. Now its debateable whether its the correct interpretation of the Islamic law but what isn't debateable is that this law is known to most Saudis.”

first, i think it probably is a correct interpretation of islamic principles. and there’s no doubt she was “guilty” of the charges. my point is it’s an anti-human rights, unenlightened law. she’s not allowed to walk with someone?! or not allowed to walk alone or dress a certain way?! it’s crazy. you may not even see it that way, but it’s the kind of thing muslims should be marching on mecca about. and, the very fact that it is a LAW illustrates the extent to which islamic scripture imposes itself on society. granted saudi arabia is an extreme example, but the same ideas operate to a greater or lesser extent in all “islamic societies”.

”But the most important thing to remember about these punishments is they usually get waived off at the last moment by the King.“

that’s very big of him, but her human rights should not be subject to the whims of the king.

i'll do the long answer. you can comment on whatever you like - the more comment the better, i think. to comment, you may have to post on another thread, as this one will expire soon. if so, go to susan's latest thread and tell me where you're responding.

Hi Walter,

Sorry I dint see your response earlier. Do you want to post your longer response or should I respond to your previous post.

"Unfortunately, there are racists like this Muslim among all religious groups, and when they read the racist rantings of the racist Asizk, they assume that he speaks for the majority who adhere to his religion."

What was it you were saying to Arminius just a bit ago...? Oh, yes, something about ad hominem attacks being logical fallacies, wasn't it?

test

yasser,
please let me know that you're checking here before i bother with my "long answer". thanks.

hello yasser,

hope you're still out there... here’s the short version. (longer version to come...)

islam motivates people to do violence to human rights. the rwanda genocide and our presence in iraq/afghanistan are not a “christian things”. in these cases violence is not motivated by religious beliefs. rwanda was/is a tribal thing. to call that religious is like calling the american civil war a christian war - because christians were involved....

western rapists don’t “do it” for jesus. christian drug lords don’t dismember people for religious reasons - that’s just the drug business. no christian cleric has issued a fatwa urging christians to kill christopher hitchens.

"suicide" bombers and sharia-enforcing vigilantes ARE motivated by their religion.

western enlightened law IS NOT based on the bible or the 10 commandments, but rather it PROTECTS us FROM at least the first 4 commandments (1 god, idols, sabbath, lord’s name) and other religious texts.

yasser,
are you there? i'm back, and will try to get to your comments this evening.

yasseryousufi

You wrote, "TPMB (whats with that long name btw, you a new Prophet or something??),"

Most people call me Tom or Mose or Moses but on here I use my full name.

Thomas Paul Baum is my given name and also my baptismal name. Moses is my confirmation name.

I have met God and God chose me to speak.

You wrote, "Its a question of perception! A woman has the sacred job of bearing child among other things. If she has several husbands at the same time it would not be possible to verify who fathered the baby. She can always seek a divorce if she isn't happy with the person she's living with and marry as many men as she like but only one at a time."

Why? Why should it be okay for a man to have more than one wife and not be for a woman to have more than one husband?

Polygamy is polygamy.

You also wrote, "Is there a new Bible you're writing?"

No, read the story, I don't know what it says in the Quran about it but in the bible, the people were not only homosexual but they were "forcing" themselves on others.

You then wrote, "Whats this cool new religion of yours called that promotes Homosexuality?"

First off, I have no "cool new religion".

Second, I am neither promoting homosexuality or heterosexuality, what I clearly tried to say was that anyone forcing themself on another either in a homosexual or heterosexual manner is wrong.

The people in Sodom and Gomorrah were clearly trying to force themselves on the visitors, they were making no attempt whatsoever in offering hospitality to the visitors but to take advantage of them.

As I have said many times, God is a searcher of hearts and minds, ... ., seems as if quite a few of the "legalistic" types are in for a "rude awakening".

Not only don't I have a "cool new religion" to offer, I am here to tell others that it is not even about "religion", at least in the way many think of "religion", but is about a "relationship" with God.

I would like to mention two things:

1. Many people have a "fine" relationship with God and don't even believe in God whereas many have a "less than fine" relationship with God and yet do believe in God.

2. "True Religion" is taking care of "widows and orphans", so it is important what one does and why one does it and what one knows.

One can have "True Religion" and not even believe in God.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

TPMB (whats with that long name btw, you a new Prophet or something??),

Its a question of perception! A woman has the sacred job of bearing child among other things. If she has several husbands at the same time it would not be possible to verify who fathered the baby. She can always seek a divorce if she isn't happy with the person she's living with and marry as many men as she like but only one at a time.

With regards to people of Sodom and Gomorrah, its common knowledge that those people did indulge in homosexualty and the Prophet Lot (Lut in Arabic) did preach them to not stray away from the righteous path. There story is told in more detail in Holy Quran as well as Tanakh and as far as I know, the whole town faced this catastrophe since all the people there used to indulge in Homosexuality/Heterosexuality. Is there a new Bible you're writing? Whats this cool new religion of yours called that promotes Homosexuality?

yasseryousufi

You wrote, "Aah CCNL! The Masochist of these blogs who enjoys the pleasure of being insulted and humiliated by any and every other poster! Forget it old man! You aint gonna get it from me! I wont even let you seek that pleasure by responding to your incessant garbage. You're a gone case as far as Im concrned. Beyond repair......absolutely!"

Not to worry, as Jesus, God-Incarnate, said, "With God All things are possible."

I thank God that God's Plan is ultimately for ALL to be with God in God's Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Farnaz1Mansouri1

You wrote, "The term "Abrahamic" was an invention of the former pope, a feel-good, self-legitimation strategy that is certainly not accepted by all scholars, theologians, and clergymen of the religions the former pope so designated."

Do you know ANYTHING that is "accepted by all scholars, theologians, and clergymen of the religions the former pope so designated"?

Seems pretty obvious tho, that Abraham is mentioned in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, whether you like it or not.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

yasseryousufi

You in response to question, "3. Do you believe that polygamy is OK?

You answered, Ans. Yes! Its better than all those extra marital affairs Christian men and women indulge in just coz they cannot satisfy their appetite for sex."

This would include a woman married to more than one man and I suppose if you take it far enough than everybody would be married to everybody else, wouldn't they?

You then wrote, "8. Do you believe that it's OK to kill gays?
Ans. No! Whether at the hands of an evangelical christian fanatic or a muslim fanatic. However If you read the strories of Lot in Bible and Jewish Religous texts why the people of Sidom were cursed and punished with a great catastrophe you'd probably understand why a majority of humanity dislikes gays."

Did you ever notice that in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah that the people that were "cursed" were people that were forcing themselves on strangers rather than extending hospitality.

As I have said, the True, Living, Triune, Triumphant God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof.

It is important what one does and why one does it and what one knows.

God looks at the person, not the "label".

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Alex Kronemer

You wrote, "For example, while 7% of the world's Muslims said in the poll that the attacks of 911 were completely justified, 55% answered the opposite, that they were completely unjustified. Keeping in mind that the poll was undertaken against the backdrop of the U.S. fighting two wars with many civilian casualties, and events like the outrages at Abu Ghraib, this by itself is an amazing result and speaks to the fact that the majority of the world's Muslims are defining their faith in a peaceful way."

Since these are the "statistics" that you present: 7% completely justified, 55% completely unjustified, this leaves 38% that I suppose are either: no opinion or somewhere in between totally justified and totally unjustified.

Since these are the statistics that you supplied and by looking at different sites, it seems as if the Muslim population of the world could be conservatively estimated at 1.5 billion than the percentages that you present come out to:

7% - 105,000,000 people
55% - 825,000,000 people
38% - 570,000,000 people

According to the statistics supplied by you this means that 825 million Muslims think the 9/11 attacks was completely unjustified and that 675 million Muslims think that the 9/11 attacks were either completely justified, somewhat justified or had no opinion, is that right?

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

The racist Asizk writes:

"No group of people enjoys bashing Islam and Muslims on every occasion-incluidng the sad and unfortunate massacre at Ft Hood-than jews and right wing extrimist fundamentalist xtians."
---------------------------
This perennial racist fails to see the jeopardy he places his fellow Muslims in by the racist example he continually sets.

Unfortunately, there are racists like this Muslim among all religious groups, and when they read the racist rantings of the racist Asizk, they assume that he speaks for the majority who adhere to his religion.

To make matters worse, in the years that the racist Asizk has posted, his co-religionists have never protested his racism, as the co-religionists of other groups speak out against the racists among them.

Hasan is, indeed, fortunate that the majority of Americans, whether Jewish, Christian, Catholic, Hindu, Buddhist, Pagan, atheist, or other, are not racists like his co-religionist, Asizk.

Both Hassan and his koranic religion will be on trial at Hassan's court-martial.

Why?

Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the massacre in Mumbai, the assassinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, the Filipino “koranics” and the Ft. Hood murders.

And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

Current crises:

The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.

Alex,

Your article is a commandable effort to understand Islam and Muslims.

Pat Robertson is an idiot who insists on advertising his utter and remarkable ignorance.

No group of people enjoys bashing Islam and Muslims on every occasion-incluidng the sad and unfortunate massacre at Ft Hood-than jews and right wing extrimist fundamentalist xtians.

Hassan should be tried as an American who committed a horrendous crime-and not as a Muslim. His faith should not paraded and demonised on and by the media.

Yasseryousufi, Yasseryousufi, Yasseryousufi, (assuming that you are not an "impostering" strawman)

Again and again and again, your extreme suffering from the Three B Syndrome i.e. Bred, Born and Brainwashed in Islam, oozes from every word you type.

We await your completion of the free and easy Five Step Method For Deprograming/Deflawing Islam followed by the deletion of the horror/terror passages of the koran.

Dear Alex Kronemer

You have presented your viewpoint in a precise and impressive manner. Thankyou for sharing with us your valuable opinion.

Ok....a remider to all posters on the blog! CCNL1, ABHAB1, Halozcel1 are just bots. They aren't programmed to respond when they are called out for their lies. They'll always run away. Maybe they are all the same guy or organization! Atleast the relation in their monikers suggests that. So yea......dont waste your time arguing with these bots, they cant respond!

UPF,Unity Production Foundation
Home Website,

A madam in headscarf is speaking(it seems to me,she is not speaking,she is menacing the world)
*....we can engage the World based on Facts,not Fear*
-How can you speak in the name of All Muslims ? Who are you ?
-Most of Muslims have already engage the World,because majority of them are Nominal and Unwillingly Muslims(including Iran and Saudia,yes,absolutely)
-*...based on Facts,not Fear*
Dear Madam,
Only one sample,yes only one sample I write.The Book says *I will cast Terror/Fear into the hearts of non-muslims,Behead/Strike their heads off...*8.12
What is this ? Is it Fact or Fear ?
-What are those Facts ? Cult of Hate which curses evertone who is not Submission Followers ?

UPF says,
Our mission is to build a respected media(Respect can not be grounded on Inconsistency and Hypocricy),creating high-quality films(Alica in Wonderlands Films such as Cities of Light)...
Right Sentence;
Our Mission/Mission Impossible is to build a media backed by CIA,MI5 and Bedouins' money,creating *moderate islam* which is the First Step to Talibanism and Saudization(Everything starts with Headscarf/Chain,tomorrow Chador,after tomorrow Shariah and eventually Fear Kingdom.Look at Iran,first,Leftists supported them and 2-3 years later leftists became *Enkilabi ziddi* and everyone knows what happened)

Dear Madam in Video,
Correct speech in Vidoe on UPF home website should be;
In soft voice(you are speaking in Loud as threat)
*I,or We,can engage the World based on Human Rights,Contemporary Values,not Cult of Hate,Cult of Beheading(Eid ul Adha/Feast of Sacrifice coming next week)

Aah CCNL! The Masochist of these blogs who enjoys the pleasure of being insulted and humiliated by any and every other poster! Forget it old man! You aint gonna get it from me! I wont even let you seek that pleasure by responding to your incessant garbage. You're a gone case as far as Im concrned. Beyond repair......absolutely!

Ad hominem attacks and name-calling continued:

"I really tire of your single-minded, pathetic jihad to discredit anyone who dares to differ with you. Life is too short to deal with such excrement."

Posted by: arminius3142 | November 21, 2009 11:30 PM

Exactly what ad hominem attack? Please elaborate. I did no such thing,
--------------------
Instances of ad hominem attacks an and name calling (A fallacy that uses emotionally loaded terms to influence an audience):

"[I]t is only in your fevered and paranoid imagination.

Does this have any meaning to you, or do you continue to insist on your blanking out anything else but your own beliefs (beliefs? you?) and wishes?

Also seems to me that the urge to deny something so blatantly obvious hints at a not-so-hidden bigotry.

That makes perfect sense to many, many scholars of all three faiths, and to anyone not burdened by self-inflicted misconceptions."

Yasseryousufi, Yasseryousufi, Yasseryousufi,

Again and again your extreme suffering from the Three B Syndrome i.e. Bred, Born and Brainwashed in Islam, oozes from every word you type.

You then try to appease your neurons by noting how non-Islamics once violated a whole host of wrongs still approved by the dictates and passages of your current koran i.e. sex slavery/polygamy, domestic violence, killing apostates and infidels, extortions, honor killings, gay bashing, and assassinations of those who offend your illiterate, greed-lust driven and hallucinating founder.

Contemporary , non-Islamics follow rules and laws established by the ancients e.g. Ten Commandments, Hammurabi's code and the
Egyptian Book of the Dead's Confessions, Chapter 125. Yes, non-Islamics fail and have failed but it was not because we do or did not know better.

When you and your fellow Muslims rewrite the koran correcting/ deleting all of its obvious horror, get back to us.

Exactly what ad hominem attack? Please elaborate. I did no such thing, it is only in your fevered and paranoid imagination.

"It is for this reason that many academics, theologians, and clergymen reject the "term" Abrahamic."
So name these people, give links. I did. Can you?

I really tire of your single-minded, pathetic jihad to discredit anyone who dares to differ with you. Life is too short to deal with such excrement.

Simpler than this I can't make it, so here it is again. Ad hominem attacks, like sweeping generalizations, are logical fallacies.

One might as well say that all these religions are "wombic" since they originate with the birth of human.

As for bigotry, it resides in the lumping of the religions together, rather than the willingness to see accept and honor their differences. Bigotry allows for the blurring of those distinctions that give these religions their individual lives. Bigots of one type find words like "Abrahamic" useful since on the basis of some knowledge of one religion, bigots can dismiss all ten or so of which they know nothing.

Alternatively, bigots of another stripe claim superiority for their religions, argue that it supersedes others, that it is the last word, etc., again with little or no knowledge of the other ten over which they claim precedence.

It is for this reason that many academics, theologians, and clergymen reject the "term" Abrahamic.

The study of Abrahamic religions is meant to look at the similarities of these three major religions, which are there, and cannot be denied. The differences are not ignored, else the whole thing would be new-age garbage, not scholarship. One good result of this is the emergence of reasons to get along, instead of killing one another. Does this have any meaning to you, or do you continue to insist on your blanking out anything else but your own beliefs (beliefs? you?) and wishes?

"...fere libenter homines id quod velunt credunt."
- Caesar

Also seems to me that the urge to deny something so blatantly obvious hints at a not-so-hidden bigotry.
-----------------------
There is no such "urge" extant as far as I know. MOreover, there is nothing "blatantly obvious" in finding a useless term useless.

One might as well say that all these religions are "wombic" since they originate with the birth of human.

As for bigotry, it resides in the lumping of the religions together, rather than the willingness to see accept and honor their differences. Bigotry allows for the blurring of those distinctions that give these religions their individual lives. Bigots of one type find words like "Abrahamic" useful since on the basis of some knowledge of one religion, bigots can dismiss all ten or so of which they know nothing.

Alternatively, bigots of another stripe claim superiority for their religions, argue that it supersedes others, that it is the last word, etc., again with little or no knowledge of the other ten over which they claim precedence.

It is for this reason that many academics, theologians, and clergymen reject the "term" Abrahamic.

"That the "term" is "popular" means neither that it is accurate nor generally accepted. Under this rubric fall Judaism, Islam, Protestantism, "Personal Other," Jeovah's Witness, Mormonism, etc.

It is a meaningless fiction, to which many who committed to accuracy rightly object."

Not generally accepted? References?
Sure, a general term. So what? Don't we use generalizing terms every day, given our human urge to categorize everything?

Seems to me that if three major religions all trace their roots to Abraham, then the term Abrahamic Religion is logical and useful. If not a universal truth - are there any? - then it is useful, as are so many other such terms in language, whether everyday talk or learned essays.

Also seems to me that the urge to deny something so blatantly obvious hints at a not-so-hidden bigotry.

"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."
- Albert Einstein

From Wikipedia:
Abrahamic religions (also known as Abrahamic faiths, Abrahamic traditions, and the religions of Abraham) has become a popular and often used designation for the monotheistic faiths of Judaism, Christianity,Islam and the Bahai Faith, emphasizing their common origin and values.
-----------------------------
That the "term" is "popular" means neither that it is accurate nor generally accepted. Under this rubric fall Judaism, Islam, Protestantism, "Personal Other," Jeovah's Witness, Mormonism, etc.

It is a meaningless fiction, to which many who committed to accuracy rightly object.

Re Abrahamic Religions, a link about Professor Guy Stroumsa who holds Oxford's first Abrahamic Religions Chair:

http://www.campaign.ox.ac.uk/news/news/abrahamic_religions.html

Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all trace their origin to Abraham. Thus, Abrahamic religions. That makes perfect sense to many, many scholars of all three faiths, and to anyone not burdened by self-inflicted misconceptions.

The term "Abrahamic" was an invention of the former pope, a feel-good, self-legitimation strategy that is certainly not accepted by all scholars, theologians, and clergymen of the religions the former pope so designated.

Mr. Kronemer,

Your attempt to equate the violent passages of the Bible with those of Koran are, in my view, invalid. The site http://thereligionofpeace.com documents from world news sources more than 14,000 acts of violence inspired by Islamic teachings since 9/11. Can you please list for me similar acts committed by Christians, Jews or Hindus where the perpretators specifically cited religious justification for their actions?

Although I'm an atheist, even I can understand that the violent passages of the Old Testament are now viewed in a strictly historical context by Christians and Jews in the 21st century. Over time, both groups have adapted their their particular brand of dogma to address the needs of their members in current society.

However, the "gates of ijtihad" are closed in Islam; no reinterpretation or reformation of the original texts have taken place since the 10th century, so modern interpretation of Islamic texts by the Imams and Mullahs remains mired in midieval social norms.

John Esposito, author of the book "Who Speaks For Islam" you mention in your column can't exactly be considered "unbiased" in his views.

From Wikipedia: (maybe not an acceptable APA citation source, but close enough for my purposes)

"Esposito founded the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University and is its current director. The center has received a $20 million endowment from Saudi Arabian Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal."

$20 million from a Wahhabi source buys a lot of favor and influence to overlook the more unsavory aspects of "conservative" Islam, don't you think?

The Response from a Muslim~!

1. Do you believe that slavery is OK?

Ans. Nope! I guess Christians and Jews never indulged in Slave trade??

2. Do you believe that sex slavery is OK?

Ans. All those hundreds of thousands of white girls working in the porn industry in Christian countries, God save them from these animals!

3. Do you believe that polygamy is OK?

Ans. Yes! Its better than all those extra marital affairs Christian men and women indulge in just coz they cannot satisfy their appetite for sex.

4. Do you believe that domestic violence is OK?

Ans. Nope! Whether done in USA or KSA, always wrong.

5. Do you believe that it's OK to kill if people change religions?

Ans. Nope! No Muslim government has killed a person for changing religion for as long as I can remember. Some Christian Kings however killed people for apostasy.

6. Do you believe that extortion is OK?

Ans. Ofcourse Not! What response did you expect??

7. Do you believe that it's OK to call others pigs and apes?

Ans. No! If you're a disciple of Robert Spencer, he's a hatemongering liar!

8. Do you believe that it's OK to kill gays?

Ans. No! Whether at the hands of an evangelical christian fanatic or a muslim fanatic. However If you read the strories of Lot in Bible and Jewish Religous texts why the people of Sidom were cursed and punished with a great catastrophe you'd probably understand why a majority of humanity dislikes gays.

9. Do you believe it's OK to kill mothers, sisters, daughters, and women for "honor"?

And. Nope! The country with most number of Honor Killings in the world is Brazil. Go Google it up! In Colombia until a few years ago it was legal to kill your wife if you saw her with another man.

10. Do you believe it's OK to kill others for insults, either real or perceived?

Ans. Nope! Neither is it OK to attack a perfectly innocent nation on a pack of lies, kill them in thousands and absolutely destroy their country!

Its obvious to any educated person who has read even a little bit history that Christianity is by far the most violent and brutal religion on the face of the earth. Its caused the most number of wars and killed an unprecedented number of non-combatants. But to the Idiots like the one who posted these question, we should ignore the violence of Christianity or any other faith and only focus on Islam. Hey kiddo! Dont try posting this blather where educated people blog again! You'd be called out for your ignorance. Try forming a Pat Robertson Fan club and exchange these kind of ideas with your like minded people!

Re Abrahamic Religions:

At Oxford University, an excellent place of learning if there ever was one, a Jewish scholar with international standing, Professor Guy Stroumsa, has been recently appointed to the Professorship of the Study of the Abrahamic Religions. That's Abrahamic Religons, to wit, Judaism Christianity, and Islam. The term is real and accepted by all scholars.

"Zebra4" is more than likely an imposter posing as a strawman for another commentator.

With respect to being an "Islamophobe": Based on the following, YES!!!!!!! (We all should be "Islamophobes" based on this reality.)

Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the massacre in Mumbai, the assassinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

Current crises:

The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.

Maybe the author should ask themself if he can answer No to any of the questions below, then he is an islamophobe:

1. Do you believe that slavery is OK?
2. Do you believe that sex slavery is OK?
3. Do you believe that polygamy is OK? 4. Do you believe that domestic violence is OK?
5. Do you believe that it's OK to kill if people change religions?
6. Do you believe that extortion is OK? 7. Do you believe that it's OK to call others pigs and apes?
8. Do you believe that it's OK to kill gays?
9. Do you believe it's OK to kill mothers, sisters, daughters, and women for "honor"?
10. Do you believe it's OK to kill others for insults, either real or perceived?

While people have rattled off the deaths of Arabs who call themselves Palestinians after they forget to mention that the Muslims have been lobbing bombs from Lebanon and Gaza on a daily basis - we forget that since the 1970s over 50,000 Islamic terrorist attacks happen worldwide and since 9/11 over 14,410 Islamic terrorists attacks have taken place. Islam is at war with all non-Muslims not only Jews and Christians.

And the author writes an article to show his own prejudices while showing us he knows ZERO about Islam, or any of the other religions he mentioned. Because if he did know something about them he would realize it is not in the base teachings of Judaism and Christianity to continually be at war with their neighbors while the base teachings of Islam is to be at war becuas they wrap the aura of holiness around hatred, violence, enslavement (that still is practiced in Islam),death and subjugation.

And as for Christianity being the most intolerant I have to remind people that it is the Judeo-Christian nations that have taken in these immigrants, even Muslim immigrants while it is not practiced in reverse. People take their lives in their hands just going into some of the Muslim only areas of the UK, Europe, the Philippines, and even here in the USA - the over 35 compounds and such neighborhoods as in Dearborn. Overseas it is much more pronounced the violence against non-Muslims by Muslims and our news doesn't cover it correctly to name the perps all the time.

So, for a guy to write a lot of nothing except to show us how ignorant he is, and to provide a fertile ground for more Christian bashing while the Christians don't want him dead, or subjugated, as Islam requires non-Muslims to be as their end goal, I applaud the author of this article.

ccnl1:

Do you identify yourself as an ISLAMOPHOBE, part of the title of this aricle?

Deist1 |
Abrahamic "revealed" religions
--------------------
There are no "Abrahamic" religions, revealed or otherwise. This "Abrahamic" business was an invention of the former pope, a feel-good, self-legitimation strategy, which has nothing to say of three radically different theological systems.

You are minimizing the importance of the written calls for violence in the "holy" books of all three Abrahamic "revealed" religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Wouldn't it be much better if people left these ancient nonsensical calls for violence behind them in the ancient past and embraced a religious belief/philosophy based on God-given reason instead? If people would recognize these "holy" books were written by men living in the ancient past in the Middle East and go strongly against our God-given reason, most of them would chose to follow what God gave them instead of what ancient men wrote. This realization is what allowed me to leave Christianity behind and become a Deist.

Progress! Bob Johnson
www.deism.com

Hitman2,(assuming you are not some imposter)

Apparently you also suffer from the Three B Syndrome i.e. Bred, Born and Brainwashed in Islam.

There, however, is an easy and free way out as long as you do not live in a Islamic country i.e. apostates in said countries are killed or beaten or both.

Are you ready?

Using "The 77 Branches of Islamic "faith" a collection compiled by Imam Bayhaqi as a starting point. In it, he explains the essential virtues that reflect true "faith" (iman) through related Qur’anic verses and Prophetic sayings." i.e. a nice summary of the Koran and Islamic beliefs.

"1. Belief in Allah"

aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc." should be added to your cleansing neurons.

"2. To believe that everything other than Allah was non-existent. Thereafter, Allah Most High created these things and subsequently they came into existence."

Evolution and the Big Bang or the "Gib Gnab" (when the universe starts to recycle) are more plausible and the "akas" for Allah should be included if you continue to be a "creationist".

"3. To believe in the existence of angels."

A major item for neuron cleansing. Angels/devils are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hittites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ugly wingy thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as fairies and "tinker bells". Modern devils are classified as the demons of the demented.

"4. To believe that all the heavenly books that were sent to the different prophets are true. However, apart from the Quran, all other books are not valid anymore."

Another major item to delete. There are no books written in the spirit state of Heaven (if there is one) just as there are no angels/"pwtfft"s to write/publish/distribute them. The Koran, OT, NT etc. are simply books written by humans for humans.

Prophets were invented by ancient scribes typically to keep the uneducated masses in line. Today we call them fortune tellers.
Prophecies are also invalidated by the natural/God/Allah gifts of Free Will and Future.

"5. To believe that all the prophets are true. However, we are commanded to follow the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) alone."

Mohammed spent thirty days fasting in a hot cave before his first contact with Allah aka God etc. via a "pretty wingy thingy". Common sense demands a neuron deletion of #5. #5 is also the major source of Islamic violence i.e. turning Mohammed's "fast, hunger-driven" hallucinations into horrible reality for unbelievers.

Accept these five "cleansers" and we guarantee a complete recovery from your Islamic ways!!!!

Your ticket to freedom:

Deformed mirrors distorts the images. Such is the mental state of few writers such as
CCNL, Abhab and Halozcel1.
Keep on yr dirty work buddies.

This is a very good article. Now if I can just ignore the essentialism pervasive in the comments...

The Islamists goal is to set the world against them because they know that Muslims outnumber the rest of the world and would win in a straight-up fight. Plus the Islamists don't care who gets hurt in the process. Let's not give them what they want, ok?

By the same token, let's not overcompensate like we did with Hasan. When someone makes threatening posts and consorts regularly with known terrorists, don't ignore it in the interests of an essentialist view of tolerance.

Yasseryousufi, Yasseryousufi, Yasseryousufi,

Again you fail to see the problem with Islam. Its your operating manual aka the koran. Delete the words demanding death to all infidels and the passages degrading women and then get back to us. Until then, no Muslim can be trusted!!!!!!

"Zebra4" has returned yet again. Again be aware, this is an anonymous blog and imposters and strawmen abound.

I can see this article and the subsequent documentary would be an anathema to the professional hate mongers and disciples of Evangelical hate preachers (I dont have to name anyone, they know who they are~!) of WaPo. It takes a lot of courage to say the right thing about Islam in a country half of which is now becoming virulently anti-islam (looking at their voting patterns). This unadulterated hatred evangelical christians have for the second biggest religion in the world (followed by 1.2 billion people) is the #1 threat to world peace. It has already resulted in 2 countries absolutely decimated with hundreds of thousands of casualties. So any baby step towards peace, as this article is attempting needs to take needs to be applauded. But America needs to do more and standup to its own Taliban nuts who cause so much death and destruction around the world. Charity as they say....begins at home~!

Zebra4 wrote:
Reform Jewish Leader Stands Behind Islam as a Great Religion of Peace
-----------------------
And the name of the Muslim leader who stands behind Judaism as a great religion?

Kronemer pontificates thus:

“For example, while 7% of the world's Muslims said in the poll that the attacks of 911 were completely justified, 55% answered the opposite, that they were completely unjustified.”

Granted that this survey is representative, which I for one who lived a large part of my life amongst them, do not believe it is even close. But suppose it is representative, then that means that 45% believe that the 9-11 attacks were justified. That means that one of every two Muslims you know have no qualms about the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians, as long as they are, offcourse, “infidels”. If you and Ms Armstrong are happy with these odds don’t expect the rest of us to concur.

Reform Jewish Leader Stands Behind Islam as a Great Religion of Peace

Monday, the 16th of November, marked another great moment in the efforts of North American Muslims and Jews to build peaceful respect for all religions as a leader of Reform Judaism publically declared Islam as a religion of peace in the face of bigoted remarks from Rev. Pat Robertson.

Mark Pelavin, Director of the Commission on Interreligious Affairs of Reform Judaism and Associate Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, sent a letter to Rev. Robertson to express disappointment and concern for his recent statements about Islam and the tragic shooting at Ft. Hood.

Pelavin urged Rev. Robertson to evaluate the negative consequences for the 1.5 billion Muslims around the world of statements of bigotry such as those he made on the November 9th airing of The 700 Club: “Islam is not a religion, it’s a violent political system, bent on overthrow of the governments of the world and world domination…and I think we should treat its adherents as we would members of the Communist Party.”

Pelavin responded with disappointment “to see a religious leader stoop to this level, attempting to delegitimize one of the world’s great faiths based on actions of someone who perverts its teachings.” Pelavin echoed a sentiment held by ISNA and many Muslims in N. America that, while the tragedy of Ft. Hood is inexcusable and horrendous, the man himself must be tried, not his religion.

Christianity calls men to humility, peace and love.
Islam calls men to arrogance, violence and hatred.
The are polar opposites.

bpai_99 If you define Christian culturally I suppose most people would call the US Christian. The US is the most tolerant country in history. If you define a Christian as someone who follows Christ and his ethics, Christianity is the most tolerant. If you define Islam by the majority Muslim countries Islam is by far the most intolerant religion. If you define Muslims as people who follow Mohammed and his ethics, then Islam is by far the most intolerant of the major religions. Look at the life of Christ – love, grace, kindness. Look at the life of Mohammed – misogamy, bigotry, legalism.

Tis all about operating manuals/doctrines- e.g. the NT vs. the OT vs. the koran vs. the Communist Manifesto vs. Mein Kampf vs. Sun-tzu’s Bingfa (c. fifth century B.C.E.).

With respect to body counts and historical time periods. From this reliable source:
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm

"The Top 21 Worst Atrocities Up to and Including the 20th Century

Rank Death Toll Cause Centuries

1 55 million Second World War (Nazi Germany atheists/pagans/Aryans/
"Christians" and Japan -Shintu) vs. the rest of the world (Christians, Jews, atheists, Hindus, Buddhists, pagans and Muslims).20C

2 40 million Mao Zedong (mostly famine) 20C

3 40 million Mongol Conquests 13C

4 36 million An Lushan Revolt 8C

5 25 million Fall of the Ming Dynasty 17C

6 20 million Taiping Rebellion 19C

7 20 million Annihilation of the South and North American Indians 15C-19C

8 20 million Iosif Stalin 20C

9 19 million Mideast Slave Trade 7C-19C

10 18 million Atlantic Slave Trade 15C-19C

11 17 million Timur Lenk 14C-15C

12 17 million British India (mostly famine) 19C

13 15 million First World War 20C

14 9 million Russian Civil War 20C

15 8 million Fall of Rome 3C-5C

16 8 million Congo Free State 19C-20C

17 7 million Thirty Years War 17C

18 5 million Russia's Time of Troubles 16C-17C

19 4 million Napoleonic Wars 19C

20 3 million Chinese Civil War 20C

21 3 million French Wars of Religion 16C

Looks like the Asians/Chinese win the body count up to and including the 20th century!! And their religions??

continued below:

And again the atrocity "winner" so far in the 21st century: the "Koranic" Crazies!!!

1a) 179 killed in Mumbai/Bombay, 290 injured

1b) Assassination of Benazir Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh

2) 9/11, 3000 mostly US citizens, 1000’s injured

3) The 24/7 Sunni-Shiite centuries-old blood feud currently being carried out in Iraq, US Troops, 3,476 killed in combat, 890 in non-combat roles, 94,231 – 102,820 Iraqi civilians killed, http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ and
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf

4) Kenya- In Nairobi, about 212 people were killed and an estimated 4000 injured; in Dar es Salaam, the attack killed at least 11 and wounded 85.[2]

5) Bali-in 2002-killing 202 people, 164 of whom were foreign nationals, and 38 Indonesian citizens. A further 209 people were injured.

6) Bali in 2005- Twenty people were killed, and 129 people were injured by three bombers who killed themselves in the attacks.

7) Spain in 2004- killing 191 people and wounding 2,050.

8) UK in 2005- The bombings killed 52 commuters and the four radical Islamic suicide bombers, injured 700.

9) The execution of an eloping couple in Afghanistan on 04/15/2009 by the Taliban.

10) Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan: (Civil war between the Afghan government and the Taliban) US troops killed in action 650, 192 killed in non-combat situations as of 10/20/09. Civilians killed in 2008, 2,118. Civilian casuality numbers are difficult to determine but since 2001 on average it appears 1000-3000 Afghan civilians die each year from the conflict. (Wikipedia)

11) The killing of 13 citizen soldiers at Ft. Hood by a follower of the koran.

Garak should consider the billions killed by New Testifiers:

The Americas: 100,000,000--conservative estimate

The Crusades: 500,000--conservative estimate

The pogroms--1.5 million--conservative estimate

World War I--21,000,000--Conservative estimate

World War II--57,000,000--Conservative estimate

Holocaust--6,000,000

-----------------------
This is just a very scant overview of New Testifier genocide. Much, much more to come.

Dear Alex Kronemer,
Executive Producer of UPF TV which established by oil riched bedouins' money.

*there are large majorities who embrace gender equality,freedom of speech and democracy*

1-Gender Equality;
In which muslim countries,there is Woman-Man Equality ? They want/wish,but,they dont try to achieve.Is this Logical ?
2-Freedom of Speech;
According to Islam Theology,you can not say anything against Book of Allah
3-Democracy;
Does islam know what Democracy is.Islam theologically rejects Democracy,because The Book condemns Dissidents/Mischiefmakers.According to Word of Allah,Mischiefmakers/Opponents may be slain.5.32
4-*to define Islam*,
Does islam need to be defined ? Everyone sees very well from Nigeria to Indonesia.
5-Cities of Light,seeds of Renaissance(Myth),
If Umayyads ruled Spain very well,What are those Alcazars/Castletowns ? If Umayyads provided Seeds of Renaissance,where were those Seeds in their homeland/middle east ?
Umayyad lasted only 80-90 years and overthrowed by people.Was it Light ?

CCNL should consider the tens of thousands killed by Judaism.

Palestine, 1948: 12,000 Palestinian dead, 600,000+ refugees due to Zio-fascist ethnic cleansing of indigenous Palestinian population.

1st Intifada: 1100 Palestinians killed.

2d Intifada: 4000 Palestinians killed.

1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon: 17,000+ Lebanese killed, including 2400+ Palestinian refugees massacred at Sabra and Chatilla refugee camps on instigation of Ariel Sharon.

1994: Jewish physician (sound familiar?) Baruch Kappel Goldstein shoots and kills (sound familiar?) 29 Muslims and wounds 150 (refresh my memory on how many were killed and wounded at Ft. Hood) at Cave of Patriarchs in illegally occupied Hebron as they prayed. Goldstein is buried in Jewish cemetery in illegally occupied West Bank. Grave becomes a Jewish shrine with Jewish pilgrims from world over. Plaque reads "To the holy Baruch Goldstein, who gave his life for the Jewish people, the Torah and the nation of Israel."

2006 Israeli attack on Lebanon: 1000+; 1 million cluster bombs dropped on civilian areas as truce talks progressed.

Gazauschwitz, 2008: 1400+ Palestinians killed, 4000 Palestinian homes destroyed.

2009: Leading Israeli rabbi declares gentile babies can be killed because they might grow up to harm Israel. Rabbi's yeshiva continues to receive funding from Israeli gov't.

2009: IDF Chief rabbi declares that Jews to who show mercy to gentiles will be "damned."

I sheer numbers of victims, especially considering murders committed compared to number of believers, Islam has a long, long way to go before it catches up with Judaism.

And this doesn't include the Jewish genocides of the Amorites and other gentile victims praised in the Old Testament.

While what Mr. Kronemer says may be true about the commonalities of Christianity and Islam, Islam remains much more of a legalistic religion than Christianity and makes many practical distinctions between other Abrahamic practitioners and themselves in matters of taxation and proof before courts of law.

Furthermore the Bible has been subject to much more intensive intellectual dissection than the Koran, whose internal contradictions and historical misinterpretations haven't nearly the force of undercutting the sacred text than those in the Bible do because they go unexamined and unpublicized because of the danger of publishing such analysis.

There are similarities with Christianity but also glaring contrasts and while the Ummah is diverse, the lines of their sacred text remain unvarying.

What the koran has brought about in just the last ten years:

1a) 179 killed in Mumbai/Bombay, 290 injured

1b) Assassination of Benazir Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh

2) 9/11, 3000 mostly US citizens, 1000’s injured

3) The 24/7 Sunni-Shiite centuries-old blood feud currently being carried out in Iraq, US Troops, 3,476 killed in combat, 890 in non-combat roles, 94,231 – 102,820 Iraqi civilians killed, http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ and
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf

4) Kenya- In Nairobi, about 212 people were killed and an estimated 4000 injured; in Dar es Salaam, the attack killed at least 11 and wounded 85.[2]

5) Bali-in 2002-killing 202 people, 164 of whom were foreign nationals, and 38 Indonesian citizens. A further 209 people were injured.

6) Bali in 2005- Twenty people were killed, and 129 people were injured by three bombers who killed themselves in the attacks.

7) Spain in 2004- killing 191 people and wounding 2,050.

8) UK in 2005- The bombings killed 52 commuters and the four radical Islamic suicide bombers, injured 700.

9) The execution of an eloping couple in Afghanistan on 04/15/2009 by the Taliban.

10) Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan: US troops killed in action 650, 192killed in non-combat situations as of 10/20/09

11) The killing of 13 citizen soldiers at Ft. Hood by a follower of the koran.

Maybe the real lesson to learn here is that there's a serious flaw in any attempt to find absolute truth in a book written by ancient men.

I appreciate this article.

I try to draw distinctions, though, between what a person believes and what a religion says. Good acts and bad acts are just that, regardless of religion, ethnicity, etc. But ideologies that say us v them, scriptures that say the devil is in them, etc are intolerance embodied.

That is why man must judge his/her scriptures in part and in whole. Then we can say, we give up that stanza, we love this stanza, see how beautiful this expression is, see how horrific that expression is, etc.

hariaum

"It is necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff." - Pope Boniface VII

No religion is more intolerant than Christianity.