So all Muslims are trying to take over the world? I guess I'd better watch my back.

Sharia law is mandatory.

-S

Whats funny is how ignorant you appear to be. Have you ever heard of Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims?

I for one am not defending Islam I just object to a crude and simplistic response to it.

Well they've been dragging their heels for a while, is all I can say. ;)

And the majority of them seem to riot when a simple cartoon is released.

-S

It would be, if every Muslim interpreted their religious texts literally. Judging from the actions of the vast majority of the Muslim population, I would have to say most do not.

PD

Was actually a tiny minority. Most Muslims just like everybody else on the planet has better things to do.

Must I comment here?

As a matter of fact, the quran calls for wars of conquest and enforced subjugation of others, it aloso orders the discirminating treatement of dhimmis and Jews and Christians - in no way Quran allwos to see them as equals, in no way. It is not that believers have a choice regarding these, but an obligation. Those you wouold call "moderates" are not folliwjhng Islam - they are violating Islam. Also, the Hadith, which inlcudes the sharia, calls for penatlies like those you listed. These penalties are not in violence of islam, but are representing it's most central scriptures.

Okay, so they manage to bring Muslims in poor countries to death all by themselves, becasue other cultures, like ours, are not Islamic. What does this tell us about islam? Two things, at least. First, they are idiots. Second, they are brutal. Nice ideology that teaches people to behave this way. Anyhow, I couldn't care less if they kill themselves.

You and many people in the west need to learn one thing, really: Islam is a fundamentalist relfgious and political ideolgy. It is fundamentalist by definition and self-understanding. It wants not to coexist and practice tolerance - it wants to rule and doiminate about all others. What is not idlamic, by definition is Islam's enemy. As long as there are enemies, there is no peace. Peace in Islam's understanding means there is nothing left than just itself: then there are no more enemies, so there is peace. Moderates as you call them, some of them, mayb e cindivinced of Wetsern ethics and value sindeed, and may be convinced of many of the inherent grim aspects of Islam indeed, and leave them out of their understanding of what islam is. but in fact by that they are already violating Islam. thgey are apostates already, and by Islam'S law must be killed. Islam's quran has no reformist section, like the glad tidings are in the bible. Quiran even has nothing that compares to the new testament, it only compares to the old testament. The Bible went beyond that - Quran not. islam got stuck with it'S head in the a$$ of history - 1400 years deep. the clash of civilisations is not only a cultural conflcit, it also is a clash of ages: medieval inquisiton versus modern humanism, so to speak.

well, expect fundamental Christians, who compare to the fundamentalism that Islam is by essence and who suffer from the same handicaps for the same reasons, Christians beeing serious in following what Jesus tried to teach are beyond that and the old testament. I oftehn have argued that the old testament and the glad tidings present two totally different conceptions of "God".

So what,m who cares? Is it forbidden to speak out a truth just because radical may threat to vandalize in the street? are they the rulers of the place, then? I say: kick their a$$es, for they already claim more than what is theirs, and alraedy have done damage enough, and have caused far too much violence and war and hate and intolerance - becasue wellmeaning soft-hearetd people like you gave room to them, too uch room, and appeased them and fell back, all just to evade conflict at all cost, no matter how high the price may be.

The price is too high, i say. Our problems with relgions come from that we already have payed too much respect to it. Fundamentalist relgion never is satisfied, it wants more, and wants all. It will never stop. And the more it gets, the more fanatical it becoms, becasue by getting more, it becomes the stronger. It does not want your reason. It wants you to give up your reason, and reject your brain, and submit to it'S tales.

So you say you agree with me that theistic relgions are bad and have caused a lot of terror and violence - but you nevertheless say they should be allowed top continue, for confronting them would lead to conflict, while letting them have their will also leads to conflict, but that you accept to let happen? you are contradicting yourself.

An Islam-made (and wanted!!!) inferno, I insist to specify. It is oltiical tactic to engage the West on every smallest, stupid, meaningless opportunity, becasue by the laws of probability, a sufficently huge number of incidents see some occaiusons where these see the West making more concessions,l and making more small steps to fall back. At the same time, Islam is totally safe from being confronted with any demands on recipricty and mutual deal on the basis of 1:1 - sine the West thinks that is racist and causes conflict, it does not do that.

Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. When you say it shall end here and there - you already have given it up. In the end: free speech does not kill - but fathwas, stonings, assassinations do. islam is no equal to free speech, and it has not to demand that free speech must be limited in order not to oppose Islam'S views. And must we really care for Islam'S view at all? Or better: shoiuld we care for islam'S views? If I need to choose between free speech and islam's - or any religious or political ideology's - demand to limit it, I know what I choose, every time. and nif nthat would mean conflict, I am willing to let loose al hell, if necessary. Becasue such ideologies have to demand nothing from us - NOTHING.

For having understood that, you show a surprising ammount of rushing-ahead obedience to Islamic demands.

And this is probably what the man really wanted to demonstrate. ;)

Those who really follow it in it'S meaning - ARE in the same bag, yes. How could it be any different?

As I said i do not know abiut theman and his political views. but regarding the Quran, it is the written basis of a totalitarian, intolerant ideology that aims at becoming the only ruler there is and to which all world and mankind must submit. The swcriptures of Jews is the thora, btw, not the old testament, as far as I understand it. Also, Jewish scholars were quite aware of the cruel nature of the god described in their books. that is why since over 2500 years their philosphers habe become very clever and witty in finding reasons that allow them to think of and understand this God as some more friendly, human-loving gentlemam (instead of the mass-killing, psychopathic tyrant that kills and tortures and calls for wars of conquest as the old testament depicts him). That is the reason for the literal hairsplitting thinking which Jewish philosphy and humour is famous for. Nevertheless, they contradict themselves - if you would say that, i would agree.

when muhammad was young, he educated himself in Jewiosh religion for around ten years, due to his contatcs he made duriong his many travels for his uncles whose caravans he led around. He then thought that he would be able to talk on same eye level with Jewish scholars, which he tried after he fled from Mekka to Medina and met three Jewish tribes there, settling around the city' land. He was wroing, he was not able to compete with them, and they showed him how huge his lack of understanding Judaism really was. This made him bitter, and since I also see him as highly narcissistic, it is the reason why Islam hates jews so much: becasue this self-inflicted humiliation made muhammad hate Jews as well. He started war and drove two tribes away. H ehtne decieved the thir one and talked him into a peace treaty - which he broke short time after and in a new war of suzrprise, he deafted them and took them all prisoners. He then ordered the mass-execution of all males, no matter the age, on the marketplace in Medina (that is why archeologists are forbidden - by death penalty, as far as i know - to start digging in Medina centre), which meant the massacring of 800-900 people and kids (monumental for the standards of that time), and all women and girls were led into slavery. the tribe sized to exist. We have a word for that today: we call it genocide.

Since muhammad invented and designed islam to support his personal ambitions, it reflects his pernal motives and driuves until today. you cannot understand why islam is like it is without knopwing about the historical true Muhammad. i would even say this is the most imporant thing you can know about Islam, even more important than the Quran itself.

But Subman is right. Ypu need to chnage your understanding what a true muslim is. If he does reject even some parts of sharia - he is not muslim in Quranic understanding. You may describe him as something, as anything, as whatever you want, but not truly islamic. The term Muslim/Islamic is reserved to describe a certain type of ideolgy with a certain set of key features - and an understanding of shria being mandatory. It is understood to be the tool keeping the faithful on the way laid down in the quran - voluntarily, or enforced.

Let'S not confuse labels, terms and names. It has become a bad habit in western disucssions of islam. And we alread pay high prices for that.

Indeed. Socialists and communists helped Khomeni a lot to overthrow the Shah. they were stupid eniough to believe they could control Islam, and that a shared enemy would make Islam their friend. But after Khomeni was safe in power, the first thing he did was to get rid of these "allies" - hundreds of these party's members, if not thousands, ended up hanging at trees and light masts. Since then, they do not play a great role in the open anymore. But they have a small milita carrying out terror strikes both against Iran, and in earlier times aginst America. Today, they cooperate with the American troops in Iraq and supply them with intel information from inide Iran. that is why Iran is pressing so hard to make america stop its support for these guys.

And that is why america now opportunistically supports them and keeps them alive inside Iran. :D They are probably closer to information on the nuclear program than anybody else, and thus a precious source.

The Graveyard's are full of people who want to take over the world.

Sadly as many Graveyard's of brave people who stopped them. :cry:

I could bet ive done more studying on islam than you have, ive even got the quran.
Read these for a start.

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

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

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

The whole "religion" is sick scam of an murderous pedophile based on nomadic tribal law and paganism, explains alot, huh?

OK OK OK Skybird I surrender!........at least for tonight! :D

How you churm out post after post like that I'll never know. :o

Seriously though we shall have to return to this another time. But in short I agree with some of what you say, disagree with some of your points and need to clarify some of my own arguments. But right now I need to get some shut eye! :zzz:

So when you say Muslims are ________, you do not refer the billions of people who call themselves Muslims, but really must not be if they don't follow what you may consider core parts of the text: eg's killing infidels and taking over the world?

I'm not being facetious, just asking for clarification.

PD

No. the splitting into the two camps took place after Muhammad'S death. It wasn nothing else but a banal but epic struggle for political power. The Caliphs were the institution that should take over the power from muhammad, one could say (not precisely), that they were what the ope is in christianity. Until the fourth Caliph, Ali, there were no real problems, and the first Caliphs were focussed on filtering and creating the final and official form of the Quran anyway. But the legitimation of Ali'S right for the seat of being Caliph was questioned by others wanting to win the title of Caliph for themselves, and Ali questioned their right in return. A civil war started that in principle lasts until today, it is fair to say it is the longest lasting war in the history of mankind. The party of Ali (Shiat Ali) formed the today's Shia community, inferior in power and numbers, whereas the mainstream is called Sunna, which dominated and persecuted the Shias (that is why suffering plays such a big role in Shia tradition and is made a cult of, comparable to the cult of constant mouring the past by the Jews). the Shiat Ali more or less lost the war. Ali'S sons were killed, himself probabaly too, but Shia mystified the event and descrobed it to be the withdrawing of the "missing Imam", for whose return Shia communities are waiting like orthodox christians are waiting for the returning of Jesus. His shrine is located in Kerbala, Iraq, that is why the city is so highly sensitive an issue.

This civil war is more critical to the poltical constellation in the middle east than is the presence of American troops in Iraq. because for the first time ever, in the form of Iran the shia are rising to equal if not superior power, and for the first time ever they cannot fall victim to another supression and persecution by the Sunni community. The concept of allowing lying and deceive over one's turee identity and intention also became allowed first in the Shia community, as a tool to survive under Shia supression, it later was taken over by Sunnis as well regadring the eternal mission to overcome all the non-Muslim world. But originally, it was a defensive measure against the Sunnis. An offensive tool it was turned into by the sunni tradition, which it is today for shias as well. The balances of power between shia and sunni have shifted today, and still are shifting. It is a confrontation that most obviously is fought out between strong Iran and weak Saudi Arabia. They also run low-intensity wars in form of the different militias in Lebanon and Palestine - it is not only a fight agai8mnst Israel, but a fight Sunni versus Shia influence. For the Muslim world, this is the real most important issue on the list - it is not Israel (of which one has learned to live with more or less), and it is not the american occupation of Iraq. These are only numbers two and three on the list.