What is fundamental Islam??

[gsvol]

They would say that based solely on the wording, not the actual context, philosophy, or critical thought behind such wording. Hence the reason I broke it up for you and you responded with "maybe".

Not so solid ground anymore, huh?

Where from do you come up with such crap??

 

[KingNick865]

Where from do you come up with such crap??

Funny, many could ask you the same thing.

 

[gsvol]

Funny, many could ask you the same thing.

How so?

 

[KB5252]

They would say that based solely on the wording, not the actual context, philosophy, or critical thought behind such wording. Hence the reason I broke it up for you and you responded with "maybe".

Not so solid ground anymore, huh?

I think the percentage of those who would condone suicide bombing in Muslim culture would agree with it's use as a means to an end at least twice as much by percentage as Christians would.

I understand what you are saying, it makes perfect sense. All I am saying is that if you put it in the context of suicide bombing (and all that goes with it) Muslims would agree with it at least twice as much, by percentage, as Christians would

 

[therealUT]

I understand what you are saying, it makes perfect sense. All I am saying is that if you put it in the context of suicide bombing (and all that goes with it) Muslims would agree with it at least twice as much, by percentage, as Christians would

That does not put the fault on the religion, though.

Take a look at the Arab world. The disparity between the haves and have nots in the Arab world is enormous. The haves, who are certainly educated, exploit the Koran in order to defer the blame to the West, instead of upon their own shoulders, in order to keep their wealth and power. The have nots, who are extremely ignorant, and therefore more easily persuaded and coerced, buy into the propaganda.

"Suicide bombing" is simply one of the few effective ways to close with and destroy the enemy. In the Middle Ages, it was easier for the have nots to actually close with and combat a wealthier enemy, simply due to the lack of stand-off weaponry.

 

[KB5252]

That does not put the fault on the religion, though.

Take a look at the Arab world. The disparity between the haves and have nots in the Arab world is enormous. The haves, who are certainly educated, exploit the Koran in order to defer the blame to the West, instead of upon their own shoulders, in order to keep their wealth and power. The have nots, who are extremely ignorant, and therefore more easily persuaded and coerced, buy into the propaganda.

"Suicide bombing" is simply one of the few effective ways to close with and destroy the enemy. In the Middle Ages, it was easier for the have nots to actually close with and combat a wealthier enemy, simply due to the lack of stand-off weaponry.

I do not blame the religion as whole. I think we have had a misunderstanding. I agree that modern technology and standoffs weapons have had an influence in shaping the tactics used by Muslims. I also agree that those with power (political and religious) have used the poor and uneducated to carry out their objectives.

The problem as I see it is that as all religions have been exposed to each other in our global community as it grows and takes shape all other religions have come together and live in peace (for the most part). The one glaring exception to this is Islam, which has grown more violent. Islam today is in conflict with every other religion they come in contact with. It is not coincidence that in just about every country where significant populations of Muslims live there is hostile conflict of varying degrees with their neighbors. I do not argue that it is an inherent trait of the religion of Islam, just pointing out that it is the direction that Islam has taken over the past 20 or so years.

At one time Islamic nations were some of the most advanced nations in the world, in a large part because they lived in peace with those around them and shared ideas about astronomy, agriculture, irrigation, social projects etc. The same cannot be said today.

 

[gsvol]

That does not put the fault on the religion, though.

Take a look at the Arab world. The disparity between the haves and have nots in the Arab world is enormous. The haves, who are certainly educated, exploit the Koran in order to defer the blame to the West, instead of upon their own shoulders, in order to keep their wealth and power. The have nots, who are extremely ignorant, and therefore more easily persuaded and coerced, buy into the propaganda.

"Suicide bombing" is simply one of the few effective ways to close with and destroy the enemy. In the Middle Ages, it was easier for the have nots to actually close with and combat a wealthier enemy, simply due to the lack of stand-off weaponry.

Some points.

The 'educated' you speak of are only educated in the religion of Islam. (I realize there are well educated people in the muslim world who have attended western schools, but they aren't much into exploiting the ignorant for political purposes.)

Don't forget the Arab attitude toward the non Arab of any stripe, they just aren't as important, particulary the blacks of Africa who they still use as slaves in many Arab countries.

In the first nine or ten centuries of Arab/muslim conquests, their major advantage was superior horses, plus their capacity for extreme savagery.

Here is why Islam employs terrorism.

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

I am not arguing the two are equal now. But the way this is being phrased is as an indictment of the ENTIRE religion as inherently violent. Look at gsvol's wackiness. He claims it is simply an axiomatic part of Islam in its entitrey to try to kill westerners.

My point is that at a given point in time you could have said the same thing about Christianity. We "got over it," so to speak. Why can't they, if they realize more stable economic and political institutions, as we have?

Perhaps their countries' economic and political institutions would stabilize if Muslims put an end to their jihads.

 

[therealUT]

Some points.

The 'educated' you speak of are only educated in the religion of Islam. (I realize there are well educated people in the muslim world who have attended western schools, but they aren't much into exploiting the ignorant for political purposes.)

I have met some impressively educated Arabs who are very much exploiting the ignorant for political purposes.

I have also heard there is a certain leader of Iran with a PhD in Civil Engineering...

Don't forget the Arab attitude toward the non Arab of any stripe, they just aren't as important, particulary the blacks of Africa who they still use as slaves in many Arab countries.

How many times do I have to reference the history of Christianity in this thread? Please, present some information that is fundamentally different from what Christians have done and what Christian institutions have condoned. At that point, what you have to offer may be intriguing and insightful.

In the first nine or ten centuries of Arab/muslim conquests, their major advantage was superior horses, plus their capacity for extreme savagery.

As was already noted by an extremely intelligent gentleman who posts here often. That gentleman also referenced the extreme capacity for savagery from the Tribes of Israel.

 

[gsvol]

I do not blame the religion as whole. I think we have had a misunderstanding. I agree that modern technology and standoffs weapons have had an influence in shaping the tactics used by Muslims. I also agree that those with power (political and religious) have used the poor and uneducated to carry out their objectives.

The problem as I see it is that as all religions have been exposed to each other in our global community as it grows and takes shape all other religions have come together and live in peace (for the most part). The one glaring exception to this is Islam, which has grown more violent. Islam today is in conflict with every other religion they come in contact with. It is not coincidence that in just about every country where significant populations of Muslims live there is hostile conflict of varying degrees with their neighbors. I do not argue that it is an inherent trait of the religion of Islam, just pointing out that it is the direction that Islam has taken over the past 20 or so years.

At one time Islamic nations were some of the most advanced nations in the world, in a large part because they lived in peace with those around them and shared ideas about astronomy, agriculture, irrigation, social projects etc. The same cannot be said today.

every country where significant populations of Muslims live there is hostile conflict of varying degrees with their neighbors.

That's why it is referred to as the 'bloody borders of Islam.'

just pointing out that it is the direction that Islam has taken over the past 20 or so years.

More like 1400 years.

And as far as having long periods of peace and scientific advancement, that is more myth than truth.

The biggest problem with Islam is two fold, the fundamentalist interprets their religious texts to say that islam should trump politics and have the ultimate power and that islam should rule the whole world.

That attitude will mean that they will forever be in conflict with all countries that don't submit.

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

Quote:
Originally Posted by gsvol
Some points.

The 'educated' you speak of are only educated in the religion of Islam. (I realize there are well educated people in the muslim world who have attended western schools, but they aren't much into exploiting the ignorant for political purposes.)

I have met some impressively educated Arabs who are very much exploiting the ignorant for political purposes.

I have also heard there is a certain leader of Iran with a PhD in Civil Engineering...

Quote:
Originally Posted by gsvol
Don't forget the Arab attitude toward the non Arab of any stripe, they just aren't as important, particulary the blacks of Africa who they still use as slaves in many Arab countries.

How many times do I have to reference the history of Christianity in this thread? Please, present some information that is fundamentally different from what Christians have done and what Christian institutions have condoned. At that point, what you have to offer may be intriguing and insightful.


Quote:
Originally Posted by gsvol
In the first nine or ten centuries of Arab/muslim conquests, their major advantage was superior horses, plus their capacity for extreme savagery.

As was already noted by an extremely intelligent gentleman who posts here often. That gentleman also referenced the extreme capacity for savagery from the Tribes of Israel.

You're reaching far into the past.

 

[gsvol]

I have met some impressively educated Arabs who are very much exploiting the ignorant for political purposes.

I have also heard there is a certain leader of Iran with a PhD in Civil Engineering...

Don't be so coy, to whom do you refer?

How many times do I have to reference the history of Christianity in this thread? Please, present some information that is fundamentally different from what Christians have done and what Christian institutions have condoned. At that point, what you have to offer may be intriguing and insightful.

More than you have. You are deflecting from the actual problem we are discussing, that is the fundamental conflict between islam and the west, or more accurately between islam and the rest of the world.

While it is true there have been conflicts between different sects of Christians, people suppressed in the name of Christianity and Christian conflict with islam, the sheer numbers of people put to the sword makes those Christian events pale in comparison, for instance 80 million Hindus killed in the name of Allah.

The fundamental difference is that Christianity does not teach that all the people of the world must convert, pay extra taxes for the time being, or die!!!!

Islam does!!

And not only that they are teaching just that here in America and we allow it while people such as yourself keep trying to equate islam and Christianity as being the same because they are both religions.

As was already noted by an extremely intelligent gentleman who posts here often. That gentleman also referenced the extreme capacity for savagery from the Tribes of Israel.

Was that not in reference to something that happened thousands of years ago for the purpose of securing a homeland and not meant to be continued over the whole of Earth????

While what he said may have been true, there is too huge a difference to ignore.

 

[therealUT]

While it is true there have been conflicts between different sects of Christians, people suppressed in the name of Christianity and Christian conflict with islam, the sheer numbers of people put to the sword makes those Christian events pale in comparison, for instance 80 million Hindus killed in the name of Allah.

Is there a fundamental difference between the intentional killing of 1 person, whose only crime is being abhorrent to your religious view, and killing 100,000,000?

No. There is not.

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

Is there a fundamental difference between the intentional killing of 1 person, whose only crime is being abhorrent to your religious view, and killing 100,000,000?

No. There is not.

So you're saying killing 100,000,000 people is no worse than killing 1 person?

 

[KB5252]

Is there a fundamental difference between the intentional killing of 1 person, whose only crime is being abhorrent to your religious view, and killing 100,000,000?

No. There is not.

I see what you are saying but killing thousands is far worse than killing one.

Would you consider _______ (pick any inmate on death row for murder) as diabolical as Hitler?

 

[gsvol]

You're reaching far into the past.

I think someone else brought the Christian Crusades.

How about in Yugoslavia in the past twenty years, the past fifty and just beyond that during WWII??

How about in the Sudan the last fifty years???

We get occasional reports about Darfur, then everyone forgets about it for a while but how many people actually even know that previously arabic muslims in control to the Sudanese government slaughtered about two million black Christian and animist people in the twenty years preceding the genocide in Darfur??
(then they assassinated the Cristian leader as soon and a peace treaty was made)

Some call the Sudan, "the African Yugoslavia."

How about the million who died in Rwanda??? Oh that was just inter tribal conflict, what no one says is that incitement by muslims was a huge factor in that crime.

How about Iran after Carter help ouster the Shah in the name of human rights and the Mullahs put more people to death in one year than the Shah was accused of in the previous thirty years??

How numerous have terrorists attacks been against western democratic governments over the past forty years?

Look inside countries where islamic sharia law is practiced and find what tolerance there is for non muslims.

In parts of England now you can find official 'no go' zones, where non muslims are forbidden to tread.

In some suburbs of Paris it is a no go zone even for French police.

Terror attacks on public transportation in Madrid and London, the recent attack in Mumbai, India?

How about the Zebra murders in California (and elsewhere) and the Yahweh bin Yahwew murders in Florida?

How far do you want to go back??

How about the million and a half Christian Armenians and three quarters of a million Assyrian Christians killed in Turkey and Iraq in the early part of the twentieth century??

We never hear on the news of see in the papers reports of one of the bloodiest undeclared wars in the world, in Algeria. In the five year period between 1992 and 1997 about 65,000 Algerians died. Those terrorists have established a presence in France, Belgium, Britain, Italy and the United States.


Here is a list of mideast terror events up to 2001.

Want recent??



2009.01.28 (Mingora, Pakistan) - Eight bullet-ridden victims of Taliban justice are found.

2009.01.28 (Kirkuk, Iraq) - Sunni extremists attack a polling station, killing two guards.

2009.01.27 (Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan) - A second Shia civilian is gunned down in as many days by sectarian extremists.

2009.01.27 (Mosul, Iraq) - Three Iraqis are killed in a car bomb attack on Kurds by suspected Sunnis terrorists.

2009.01.27 (Pattani, Thailand) - A Buddhist married couple is brutally murdered by Muslim gunmen in a drive-by attack.

2009.01.27 (Kissufim, Israel) - Palestinian bombers murder an Israelis border guard.

What particular time frame would you like to discuss?

 

[gsvol]

Is there a fundamental difference between the intentional killing of 1 person, whose only crime is being abhorrent to your religious view, and killing 100,000,000?

No. There is not.

I think you are suffering from some form of fundamental intellectual arrogance.

1 is murder.

100,000,000 is mass genocide.

 

[Headed For Home]

I have met some impressively educated Arabs who are very much exploiting the ignorant for political purposes.

I have also heard there is a certain leader of Iran with a PhD in Civil Engineering...

How many times do I have to reference the history of Christianity in this thread? Please, present some information that is fundamentally different from what Christians have done and what Christian institutions have condoned. At that point, what you have to offer may be intriguing and insightful.


As was already noted by an extremely intelligent gentleman who posts here often. That gentleman also referenced the extreme capacity for savagery from the Tribes of Israel.

Why do you go to such irrational lengths to defend Islam? Are you a Muslim that we have ofended by our posts? Please try to stick to the discussion at hand. We are not discussing the history of the middle ages or the early history of the tribes of Israel. We are discussing the current day hostilities of Islam.

 

[therealUT]

So you're saying killing 100,000,000 people is no worse than killing 1 person?

I see what you are saying but killing thousands is far worse than killing one.

Would you consider _______ (pick any inmate on death row for murder) as diabolical as Hitler?

I think you are suffering from some form of fundamental intellectual arrogance.

1 is murder.

100,000,000 is mass genocide.

At its very foundation, it is the same act. Only that act is repeated x amount of times.

 

[therealUT]

Why do you go to such irrational lengths to defend Islam? Are you a Muslim that we have ofended by our posts? Please try to stick to the discussion at hand. We are not discussing the history of the middle ages or the early history of the tribes of Israel. We are discussing the current day hostilities of Islam.

The lengths I go to are certainly not irrational.

I am not a Muslim. I am a devout Catholic. I have often spent quite a bit of time defending Catholicism and Christianity in these very forums. You are free to track my history of posts, if you would like.

I, however, will not stand by and let a bunch of hypocrites state as fact something that does not even touch truth.

You want to speak of rational and irrational, yet, all of you turn a blind eye to the very same acts committed by Christians and Jews over the past 6,000 years.

 

[gsvol]

Why do you go to such irrational lengths to defend Islam? Are you a Muslim that we have ofended by our posts? Please try to stick to the discussion at hand. We are not discussing the history of the middle ages or the early history of the tribes of Israel. We are discussing the current day hostilities of Islam.

Current events in the UK.

I, however, will not stand by and let a bunch of hypocrites state as fact something that does not even touch truth.

You want to speak of rational and irrational, yet, all of you turn a blind eye to the very same acts committed by Christians and Jews over the past 6,000 years.

No one has denied that crimes have been committed by Christians and in the name of Christianity in the past, what we are pointing out and not being hypocritical about either, is that those acts have been condemned by Christian leaders.

The same and to a far worse degree continue to be done by muslims and have not been condemned by muslim leaders, if fact they have been encouraged.

Can you see that difference???

The blind eye you speak of is ignoring the building of mosques here in America and the hate speech that is being preached in those mosques.

This will lead to very real problems for us all in the future.

 

[KB5252]

The lengths I go to are certainly not irrational.

I am not a Muslim. I am a devout Catholic. I have often spent quite a bit of time defending Catholicism and Christianity in these very forums. You are free to track my history of posts, if you would like.

I, however, will not stand by and let a bunch of hypocrites state as fact something that does not even touch truth.

You want to speak of rational and irrational, yet, all of you turn a blind eye to the very same acts committed by Christians and Jews over the past 6,000 years.

I hope this comment was not directed at me. I certainly do understand there was little if any difference in what Christians, Jews or any other religion have done when compared to Islam.

I have stated earlier that as of right now as other religions live fairly peacefully Muslims (at least a significant portion anyway) are at war on some level in every country where they come in contact with those who believe differently. This problem is made even more problematic given the way the world is intertwined in our global community.

 

[therealUT]

No one has denied that crimes have been committed by Christians and in the name of Christianity in the past, what we are pointing out and not being hypocritical about either, is that those acts have been condemned by Christian leaders.

Not immediately and not in all cases.

The same and to a far worse degree continue to be done by muslims and have not been condemned by muslim leaders, if fact they have been encouraged.

There were plenty of brutal actions taken in the name of Christianity that were encouraged by Christian leaders.

The blind eye you speak of is ignoring the building of mosques here in America and the hate speech that is being preached in those mosques.

This will lead to very real problems for us all in the future.

I agree with this sentiment. I am not in favor of those who exploit Islam in order to violently push an agenda.

 

[MontereyVol]

No one has denied that crimes have been committed by Christians and in the name of Christianity in the past, what we are pointing out and not being hypocritical about either, is that those acts have been condemned by Christian leaders.

So Muslims can, in say 500 years condemn these acts and you will defend them?

The same and to a far worse degree continue to be done by muslims and have not been condemned by muslim leaders, if fact they have been encouraged.

Keep in mind, MSM back then is not like it is now. Believe me atrocities were commited by Christians and Jews alike on other religions that make these guys look like sheep.

Others factors to keep in mind would be the scale of death you guys talk about (ie 1 vs 1000) The population size now vs back then is more dense. The ability for an extremist to kill on a grander scale is more attainable now then it was back then.

 

[gsvol]

Not immediately and not in all cases.

There were plenty of brutal actions taken in the name of Christianity that were encouraged by Christian leaders.


I agree with this sentiment. I am not in favor of those who exploit Islam in order to violently push an agenda.

Which brutal actions do you speak of specifically??

Another problem with Islam is it's infringement upon our freedom of speech, one of the foundation blocks of western free societies.

Some examples were when the Pope quoted a historian on the history of islam and their were riots and murders on a fairly widespread scale, the Danish cartoon episode and then the recent UN edict not to criticize islam.

Where are we going with this, either say that islam is a religion of peace or they get violent???

Sounds like the first step into submission and dhimmitude to me, not that we may not have already taken several steps in that direction.

So Muslims can, in say 500 years condemn these acts and you will defend them?

Keep in mind, MSM back then is not like it is now. Believe me atrocities were commited by Christians and Jews alike on other religions that make these guys look like sheep.

Others factors to keep in mind would be the scale of death you guys talk about (ie 1 vs 1000) The population size now vs back then is more dense. The ability for an extremist to kill on a grander scale is more attainable now then it was back then.

I can't say what I would say in 500 years and i doubt that if islam is still around they will condemn violence in the name of jihad.

So you are talking about something from 500 years ago??
Can you be any more specific as to what you are referring to??

And no, there has never been any era that made these guys look like sheep in comparison.

On the barbarity of Khalid, Benjamin Walker writes:

A wine-lover and lustful debaucher, Khalid took sickly sadistic delight in beheading a defeated chieftain on the battle-field, selecting his wife (if young) or daughter and celebrating his nuptials with her on the spot soaked with the blood of the victim (father/husband of the bride). [Walker, Foundations of Islam, p. 316]

Khalid slaughtered entire tribes. Who knows how many?

All right, here are some stats from back then:
(and remember, with each conquest many many of the captured were taken as slaves.)

At first Muhammed had his followers pray toward Jerusalem but when Jews in Medina (who were there to escape Persian persecution back home) refused to give him money he exterminated or exiledthem and had his followers pray toward Mecca instead.

In the Muslim campaign of 634, the entire region between Gaza and Caesarea was devastated and four thousand peasants, comprised of Christians, Jews and Samaritans, who were simply defending their lands, were massacred.

As Amr advanced into Egypt in 641, he captured the city of Behnesa near Fayum, and exterminated the inhabitants. Nobody was spared, irrespective of surrendered or captured, Old or Young or Women. Fayum and Aboit suffered the same fate. At Nikiu, the entire population was put to the sword.

In Armenia, the entire population of Euchaita was wiped out. Seventh century Armenian chronicles recount how the Arabs decimated the population of Assyria and forced a number of inhabitants to accept Islam and then wrought havoc in the districts of Daron, southwest of Lake Van. In 642, it was the turn of the town of Dvin to suffer. In 643, the Arabs came back with “extermination, ruin and slavery”.

It was the same ghastly spectacle in North Africa, Tripoli was pillaged in 643; Carthrage was razed to the ground and most of its inhabitants were slaughtered. Michael the Syrian describes how the first Omayyad Caliph Muawiya, who took power in 661, sacked and pillaged Cyprus and then established his domination by a “great massacre”. In the capture of Istakhar (Persia), 40,000 Iranians were slaughtered. Indeed, Anatolia, Sicily, Mesopotamia, Syria, Iraq, Iran and wherever Muslims have marched, were presented with the same spectacle.

According to Al-Biladuri in 712, after the capturing the port of Debal, in Iraq, the Muslim army slaughtered the inhabitants over three days and the priests of the Christian temples were massacred.

Koran [47:7]: “O True believers, when you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads.”

In Brahmanabad, some say 26,000, men were put to the sword. One-fifth of the captured slaves (women and children), which amounted to 20,000, amongst whom, were the daughters of Sind Chiefs along with King Dahir’s severed head, were sent to Hajjaj as the share of the states and the remainder were distributed amongst the soldiers.

(It is reported that the Bosnian president sent 26 severed Christian Serbian heads to the Mullahs of Iran to prove their victory.)

The stream of captured slaves continued to flow from India to Baghdad ever since Kassim captured Sind and Hajjaj alone is said to have forwarded 60,000 slaves from India (~1/5 of total) to the caliph Walid I (705-715 CE).

In 704-705, Caliph Walid I gathered together the nobles of Armenia in the Church of St. Gregory and in the Church of Xram on the Araxis and burned them alive. The rest were crucified and their women and children were captured as slaves. The worst happened to the Armenians between 852 and 855.

In Egypt in the sacking of Euphesus in 781, 7,000 Greeks were taken captives and were deported as slaves en masse.

The 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13, 14th 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries read much the same.

True the numbers may be greater now as there are more people in the world but is that so important as addressing the basic problem??

Ruthless and violent followers of Mohammed destroyed ancient civilizations in Babylonia, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Persia, Afghanistan, and North Western India. Islamic theory of violence has no antecedent in any earlier systems of thought, philosophy or tradition. The Islamic brutality fell upon on several countries as if from nowhere.

Islam forcefully converted traditional, peace-loving people with the sword, liberated them from their life-sustaining moral standards, and enslaved them with the absurd, rigid, fanatical, dualistic and violent Islamic ideology.

Islamic fascists presented the fantasy of an Islamic paradise and indoctrinated converted people, and severed the lifeline that connected the traditional peace loving people.

Islam through deceit, incitement, assassination and mass murder robbed their wealth, and plundered their traditional land.

Islam has done many things with absolute cruelty and genocide. A reign of terror was used to eliminate philosophers, poets, intellectuals, artists and free thinkers--to achieve a single Islamic goal, to control the population of the world through the use of terror.