SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Muslim uproar

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Muslim uproar - (Merged) (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=98107)

He's got courage, that a point to his credit.:up:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

He's got courage, that a point to his credit.:up:

But he is not as consequent as it seems, softening things up again: "But you have to call terrorism for what it is - it is a movement that invokes in a totally blasphemous and illegitimate way the sanction of Islam to justify what it does." I wonder what is so blasphemous and illegitimate in the legitimiation of Islamic terror. Just because the Quran names this kind of violance by other words ("schlagt den Ungläubigen auf die Nacken"), it does not change the demand for violance itself. As long as we still take this kind of consideration when confronting Muslims about their violance-hungry ideology, we cannot expect that they give ground and start thinking about it - they just see that we give them the room to evade any self-reflection. why should they start to rethink, to test their ideology, to analyse it - if they feel no pressure and no pain by running aground with it? If one wants to do "reasonable Muslims" a favour - one should start talking tough with them, and not accepting any verbal distortions any longer.

Yes, I do see how he's softening it (to a degree). Yet he's still taking a great big leap by saying any of this at all, he's putting his career at stake. Something quite rare among todays' politicians (unless it's something illegal that benifits them directly:nope: ). The pope I'm not so worried about he's in that position for life.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

What has the pope done? He illustrated that religion shall never be an excuse for violance, and shall not be propagated and spread by the use of violance, and that the use of violance to acchieve this necessarily is a violation of God's wishes himself.

Why didn´t he use the history of his own church to illustrate that? There would have been more than enough good examples, he didn´t have to bring Islam into it.

I'd probably try to smooth out as well if I suddenly got thousands of angry people at me. Especially after witnessing the rabbid mobs after the Mohammed cartoons.

AT this point however, I just cannot take them serious. I mean, I can when some nut job decides its a fine thing to blow up innocent people in suicide actions. But that torches-and-pitchfork mentality is just too easy to get out in them. It is as if they almost WANT to be offended. Always waiting for signs that can reinforce what they already know: That the west thinks little of islam.

Time for a sermon.

Quote:

The Woman Girt with a Sword

Written by John Whiteside Parsons

It is to you, woman, beautiful lost redeemer of the race, that I dare address this chapter. That which stirs in you now is not madness, is not sin, is not folly, but is life, new life, and joy and fire that will beget a new race, and create a new heaven and a new earth.

When you were a child, did not the wind speak to you and the sun? Did you not hear the mountain's voice, the voices of the river and the storm? Have you not heard the tidings of the stars, and the voices in the silence, ineffable?

Have you not gone naked in the forest, with the wind over your body, and felt the caress of Pan? And your heart has swelled with spring, blossomed with summer, and saddened with the wolf of winter. These things are the covenant, and in them is the truth that is forever.

And you have sought companions as high-hearted as yourself, and found them not, save in elusive memories in dream and song. For you found a blight over the world, a blight of silence and sorrow, and your companions walked in guilt and shame, in fear and hate, sin and the sorrow of sin, and you were alone. Ah, there was laughter, but a hectic laughter; pleasure but furtive pleasure, unsatisfied and ashamed. And now your heart is saddened. But be not sad, my beloved. Be joyous and unafraid. For within you is the song that shall shatter the silence, the flame that will burn away the dross.

It is you that are the redeemer; the redeemer of sin and sorrow, of guilt and shame, you, woman, oh splendor incarnate! How long have you served in chains, a slave to the lust of pigs and the guilt of pigs?

How long have you writhed under the foul degradation of your holy name, whore, or suffered silently under the infamous degradation called virtue?

How well have you known the stake, the rack, the whip, bar, chains, imprisonment, entombment in the service of your master.

And was the bond fear, was it weakness, was it cowardice and inferiority? Oh, shame of man, it was none of these, it was love. A man was crucified in a redemption that failed. Yet were ten times ten million men crucified, this infamy were not redeemed.

Priest, father; husband, lover; jailer; judge, executioner; despoiler; seducer; destroyer; this has been your lover; your master; oh, woman defiled.

Yet pity him, for he too sought love.

But there is an end, and a beginning and the beginning and all the future is with you. For you are the mother of the new race, the redeemer and lover of the new men, the men that shall be free.

Now I shall speak to you of men. Men desire three things of woman, a mother greater than themselves, a wife less than themselves, and a lover equal with themselves. Against the mother they are ever in revolt, the wife they hold in contempt, the lover ever eludes them.

Consider the husband; how he hates woman and flees himself, fearing that he will slay her.

Consider the great lover; how he grasps for love and his hands close upon nothingness.

These are bewildered, frightened children, playing games against the dark. And those who wear brass and swords, who strut and slay, are they not the most frightened of all? Therefore pity them, therefore forgive them.

In the ancient world there were men for a season, then cities arose, and leisure, the riddle of the sphinx, and they turned to gilded popinjays, gracefully accepting futility.

Then Christianity, an anodyne for slaves, an enteric for barbarians whose deeds gave them indigestion, a whip for slave masters.

Yes, Faust is the prototype of the middle ages, but not the Faustus of whom Kit Marlowe tells. It is a darker Faust, Gilles de Retz, who betrays the Maid in his lust for power; then, smitten, prays to God in his Chapel and ascends to all horror in his cellars.

And so the dreary story until man, appalled by his own nightmares, turns at last to the dream of liberty.

It is the voice of Voltaire, jaded, cynical, weary of folly, that sounds the opening bar of a tremendous and mocking prelude; Tom Paine, one man, one real man, broken and at last betrayed by all the wooden champions; Cagliostro, plotting the revenge of the Templars with a woman and a necklace; Will Blake speaking uncomprehended with the tongue of angels; Shelley and his beautiful futile gesture; Swinburne, that almost recreated Helas before he too was broken; Byron, Pushkin, Gautier; all instruments in a prelude to a symphony that was never played.

And science, how it was to save us. That brave new world of Huxley, Darwin, Hegel and H.G. Wells, with only the voice of Spengler to dissent. Science remaking the world, an international language, a universal brotherhood, beyond nationality or prejudice or creed. That house of cards, beautiful vision, how it has fallen. These creators of the new age, who dare not speak or think or move without permission of the military. Unboundaried titans, who will hang for speaking across one border; where is your new world?

Champions, where is freedom? what has gone awry? A man can guess but no man can solve. We must turn to woman for the answer.

It was many thousand years ago, before histories were written, that the change came. We must turn our memories even farther. why can we not, who sprang from those loins, though it be long ago, the age of Isis that is mistakenly called the matriarchy. It is not a matriarchy as we imagine it, a rule of clubwomen, or frustrated chickens. It is an equality. The woman is the priestess, in her reposes the mystery. She is the mother; brooding yet tender; the lover; at once passionate and aloof, the wife, revered and cherished. She is the witch woman. It is coequal. Undifferentiated, the man, chieftain, hunter; husband, lover; thinker; doer. The woman, priestess, guardian of the mystery, sibyl of the unconscious, prophetess of dreams. Thus balance; stability.

Then, catastrophe untellable, the patriarchy, archtypified by the demonic monosexual monster; Jehova. And now, in the rule of priests, woman is an inferior animal, man a superior god, isolated, and at the mercy of his merciless intelligence. It is war, total war without quarter; between the emotions that must and the intellect that will not. Every religion in the patriarchy is a self contradictory monstrosity - Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Mohammedism, facism, communism, democracy, science and every other faith of the historical world. It is dogma, creed based on axioms that shift like straws in the wind of the intellect, and upon this shifting structure man has failed, and must fail, for he knows their futility and fights for them with all the sick fury of frustration. He knows that he is a little boy playing with erector toys and chemical sets, playing cops and robbers in a game that goes too far.

He has lost his mother; his wife fails him, his lover eludes him. The mystery has gone out of the temple, banished by a senile and self sufficient council of beards.

Woman, woman, where are you? Come back, woman, come back to us again! Forgive, forget, sit in our temples, take us by the hand, kiss us on the lips, tell us that you love us, that we are not alone. Witch woman, out of the ashes of the stake, rise again!

You see, it was in the dianic cult that the old way continued. Those splendid and terrible women, Messalina, Toffana, La Voisin and de Brinvilliers, took magnificent revenges. And others, women and men too, sought the forbidden mystery in secret rites, and purchased a brief reunion at an awful price.

This was the hope in the maid of Orleans, the hope of hopeless millions that at last was come the woman who would redeem them. May her fate and her failure teach you that innocence is no protection.

Be cunning, oh woman, be wise, be subtle, be merciless. I have said, understand, forgive, forget. But forget not overmuch. Trust nothing but yourself.

I have spoken of those great poisoners, but there is a worse revenge. Know that all revenge is revenge on self and most terrible is that taken by the frigid woman. Count her in the millions and in the ten millions. Heed not what she tells her husband or lover; heed well what she tells her intimate, her doctor.

But with many the cause lies deeper. It lies in two things, the failure of her mate to be a man, and her failure to be true to herself.

There is the black murderous guilt with which parents poison their children, and that is a cause of frigidity.

There is suppressed incestuous love.

There is fear of disease, and of children.

But you, who have known something of these things, have no shame therefore. Strength is not born, it is gained by understanding and overcoming.

Then go free! Then sing the old, wild song: EVOE IO, EVOE IACCHUS IO PAN IO PAN EVOE BABALON!

Go to the mountains and the oceans and the forest, go naked in the summertime that you may regain the old joy and love gladly and freely under the stars.

But the body is not beautiful? Here is a secret. The body is molded by the mind. Embrace fear, repression, hate, then look upon the body - or rather do not look upon it. But go free, love joyously, without restraint, run naked a little. Then watch the cheeks flush, see the breasts swell, the supple contours, the flowing rhythm. All disease and all deformity are bred in fear and hate. Therefore, oh woman, are you called healer.

Woman, priestess of the irrational world! Irrational, but enormously important, and how deadly because it is unadmitted and denied.

We do not want to be drunken, murderous, frustrated, poverty stricken, miserable without cause. These things are not reasonable or scientific, yet they do exist. We say we do not want war. But the cause of war is a psychological necessity and war will continue until that necessity is otherwise fulfilled.

We do not avail in saying that we will love this person or hate that person because it is reasonable. We are moved willy-nilly despite our reason and our will forces out of the unconscious, irrational world, forces that speak to us in dreams, in symbols and in our own incomprehensible actions, and that would only be redeemed by understanding, whose name is woman. Only after understanding can will and intelligence prevail, for they are otherwise no more than blind, self destructive force.

Woman, put up unworthy weapons. Put up malice and poison, false frigidity and false stupidity. Draw the sword, the two-edged sword of freedom, and call for a man to meet you in fair combat, a man fit for your husband, fit father for your eagle brood.

Call upon him, test him by the sword and he will be worthy of you. For you two are the archetypes of the new race.

Somewhere in the world today there is a woman for whom the sword is forged. Somewhere there is one who has heard the trumpets of the new age, and who will respond. She will respond, this new woman, to the high clamor of those star trumpets; she will come as a perilous flame and a devious song, a voice in the judgment halls, a banner before armies. She will come girt with the sword of freedom, and before her kings and priests will tremble and cities and empires will fall, and she will be called BABALON, the scarlet woman. For she will be lustful and proud; she will be subtle and deadly, she will be forthright and invincible as a naked blade. And women will respond to her war cry, and throw off their shackles and chains, and men will respond to her challenge, forsaking the foolish ways and the little ways, and she who will shine as the ruddy evening star in the bloody sunset of Götterdämerung, will shine again as a morning star when the night has passed, and a new dawn breaks over the garden of Pan.

To you, oh unknown woman, the sword pledged. Keep the faith!

I don't think I could force myself to read that. Seems very crazy.

It's philosophy.....and one written in where reality is at a great distance from it.

Philosophy holds little use other than to waste time with meaningless haste. To focus attention to itself in the goal of self-perpetuation without goals or ends.

(btw, you really didn't need to post that photo with the article).

*EDIT*

Looks like the Mohammedans have done an excellent job of refuting the Popes' remarks (sarcasm).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060916/...nians_churches

How many have downloaded the translation of the Pope;s speech and read it?

I did and well it seems a storm in a teacup and I find myself agreeing with Skybird.

If you read the comments on the BBC news section's have your say you will see some ridiculous ones asking for the Pope to step down. It's not going to happen and the Catholic church and teh pope are not going to apologise especially when there is nothing to apologise for.

I read one comment that the invasion of Byzantium (by muslims) was for self defence due to incursions from Byzantium, as written by one guy on the BBC Have your Say, and the gist was that it was fine. Now don't get me wrong but isn't this why Afghanistan and Iraq were invaded? So it's the other side of the same coin so they shouldn't be getting upset.

But the popes speech was basically how can reason and faith can coexist, and showing that reason isn't blaspehmous but entwined with faith, the example being that you don't go about preaching by violence, that is not reason, it is against the faith, so in order to be faithful to god and his words you have to act with reason, think about what you do and why.

Also I know the Christian church doesn't have a bloodless history but AFAIK no church of the Christian faith is calling for a wholly christian world, and didn't the Pope apologise for the way the Catholic church treated the Jews in the past?

BTW my first name is Benedict.....

Yes they really have red his speech very well - that's why it took them close to two days to even react to it! Has anyone noticed? The speech was held on Tuesday - the hysteria started on Thursday.

He said:

"God is not pleased by blood and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature... Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats. "

No wonder that Islam has a problem with that and feels offended by being reminded of it's deficits! compare this to the many extremely violant passages in the 2nd, 4th, 8th and 9th Sura, and thoughout all of Quran, where violance, fighting and killing is even described as a pleasing of God, and a sure way to gain his sympathy!

"To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm or weapons of any kind or any other means of threatening a person with death,"

Reply: burning churches. Okay then. Islam makes sick minds. No offending, but a logical conclusion. even "moderate" Turks in Germany are attacking the Pope. A little generalization is in order, then.

2:190 - "And fight in the way of Allah those who fight you."
2:193 - "Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah's"
2:244 - "So fight in the way of Allah, and know that Allah is all-hearing, all-knowing."
4:76 - "Those who are believers fight in the way of Allah, and the unbelievers fight in the idols' way. So fight the friends of Satan; surely the guile of Satan is ever feeble."
8:39 - "Fight them till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah's entirely."
9:12 - "But if they break their oaths after their covenant and thrust at your religion, then fight the leaders of unbelief."
9:29 - "Fight (qaatiloo) those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and his messenger have forbidden -- such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book -- until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled."
9:123 - "O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you, and let them find in you a harshness
2:191 - "And slay them wherever you come upon them"
2:191 - "But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then if they fight you, slay them - such is the recompense of unbelievers."
4:89 - "then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them"
4:91 - "If they withdraw not from you, and offer you peace, and restrain their hands, take them, and slay them wherever you come on them; against them we have given you a clear authority."
9:5 - "Then when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush."
4:74 - "So let them fight in the way of Allah who sell the present life for the world to come; and whosoever fights in the way of Allah and is slain, or conquers, we shall bring him a mighty wage."
4:74 - "When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads."

To hell with it. It's bandit's thinking, for a bandit's world, 7th century. Greed and hate and aggression, no sign of holiness. Bah.

It is said that Islam loves peace and only fights in self-defense. Historically that is not true, it'S fight for the most in invasions and wars of attack, so I don't see it like that peaceful image, but just imagine it would be like that - of what help would that be, if even a carricature that is absolutely rule of the day and tame and according to western common practice and was pusbolished in a wetsern paper, in a Western country, is enogh to make Islam declare a case of violant self-defense? What trust you can put i9nto the reason of an actor who acted the most aggressive thorughout hisn own history, calls any self-defense of his vitim an act of aggression and an attack on Islam, and that even does not care to read a speech carefully and instead willingly ignores all context - just so that he can go onto the streets again, and burn symbols of those that refuse to become like him? Problem is that to a greater degree than any other political or religious ideology Islam considers itself to be the best world possible, to be in the best interest of all mankind, and that it therefore has the right to even impose itself on others who do not want to be part of it. That it willingly also use bribery to lurk others into it's realm is nothing that makes it's holiness shine in a brighter light. Muhammad used gifts and giving priviliges to secure the suppoort of his followers, he distributed the prey of his many many wars, and the crowd was cheering. Strange way to be serious aboiut a "holy message". Ah, bah-bah - it's all so disgusting. :down:

I take the freedom to hijack the comment by a reader at Dhimmiwatch. take note of the texts he refers to.

Quote:

Salih Kapusuz reportedly said of the Pope's speech, "It looks like an effort to revive the mentality of the Crusades."
Fighting back against the Muslims who threaten to invade our countries and kill and/or dominate us: sounds like a smart mentality for the Pope to promote and for the world to adopt.
I hope the Pope doesn't back down.
Posted by: Josephine at September 15, 2006 11:23 PM

We're forgetting that that the Muslims are reacting so violently because what Pope Benedict XVI said was true:
Jihad: The Holy War of Islam and Its Legitimacy in the Quran
Ayatullah Morteza Mutahhari
http://www.al-islam.org/short/jihad/
Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders - World Islamic Front Statement
23 February 1998
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm
Islam's War to Save the World - 1,300 Years of Struggle
by Howard Bloom
http://howardbloom.net/militant_islam_timeline.htm
THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE GREAT CALIPHATE
(Explanation of the Third Great Jihad)
by Larry Abraham
http://web.archive.org/web/20060916062237/http://www.globalspecialoperations.com/clash.html
Enemy Islam. An Interview with the Bishop of Rumbek, Sudan
by Sandro Magister
http://www.chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=7044&eng=y
Twenty-first Century African Slaves - In the Land of Islam
by Sandro Magister
http://www.chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=7007&eng=y
I could list more, but I think people's eyes would glaze over.
Pope Benedict should apologize for his TRUTHFUL WORDS when the Muslims have apologized for the TERRIBLE DEEDS of the genocide of nearly 2.5 million, along with the forced sale into SLAVERY of another 750,000 black African Christians, Animists and Muslims over the last 20 years in Southern Sudan and Darfur and errorist acts against innocent civilians all over the world that has taken the lives of no less than 4,500 innocent civilians and would have slaughtered more except for the efforts of polices and armed forces of countries as diverse as Australia, India, the Phillippines and the United States.
If these Muslim clerics would condemn these acts without reservation, and would condemn the attempted bombing of numerour Shia Mosques simply because the worshippers were Shia, Then I will e-mail the Pope and post a letter telling him to apologize for his truthful story.
Otherwise, I'll say that the truth often hurts, esp. those who want to be in denial about the violant nature of their religion and its need for Reformation and Renewal.
Michael

Over the past months I have red the same numbers that he is quoting there.

Islam wouldn't need to have any relevance in the world and in the West today, if they just would not have that damn O-I-L. That's the only reason why our representatives keep on talking to them, shaking their hands, and smile at their faces: O-I-L. We would not need them to sell goods they never learned the skill to invent and produce themselves. We would not need to deliver them weapons and tools to build them. we would not need to send them medicine they cannot produce themsleves. We would not need to send the Red Cross in when they have a desaster and find their socieities are too inadequate to handle that alone. We would not need to accept their demands to open the West for Muslim colonisation more and more. We would not need to tolerate Islamic presence in the West. we would have the freedom to simply leave them alone - and their would be nothing they could do about it. we would not need to invite them, as long as they are what they are. We would be free, and would have the freedom to defend our freedom. It would not be at their cost, for they voluntarily choose to live their lifes like they do and have been commanded by Muhammad to do - we do not demand them to stay where they are, it was their decision. We would be free just to move on and leave all the trouble with Islam behind. And we would have the freedom to set up preconditions: we would be able to demand them to give up their primitve minds and laws, clean their hands off all the blood, apologize for all the violance and desaster they have brought on human civilization, and then - only then - we would be able to decide if we invite them into our house, or not, and teach them how to raise skills and how to create a society's possebilities like our own. - We would have the freedom to choose. We would be free to no longer depend on them. We would be free to no longer accept their terms. we would not need to accept any obligations towards them. We would be free to laugh in their faces, turn our backs on them, and leave them alone, laughing, and living a much better life.

It's not their reason, it's not their wonderful culture, it's not their peaceloving attiude, it's not their convincing tolerance, it's not their arts and treatment of women, it'sd not their magnificent reason and logic, it's not the attractiveness of their ideology, it's not the legal codes, it's not their ethics and values.

It simply is about their damn O-I-L.

Conclusions, anyone?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

Philosophy holds little use other than to waste time with meaningless haste. To focus attention to itself in the goal of self-perpetuation without goals or ends.

I disagree. Even the most base examinations of history clearly demonstrate that philosophy has shaped the course of thought in both the east and west.

Quote:

(btw, you really didn't need to post that photo with the article).

I agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gizzmoe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Why didn´t he use the history of his own church to illustrate that? There would have been more than enough good examples, he didn´t have to bring Islam into it.

http://www.faz.net/s/RubCF3AEB154CE6...~Scontent.html

"Die Gewaltgeschichte des Christentums ist beednet, in der Gewaltgeschichte des Islam stecken wir mittendrin. die völlig unverhältnismäßigen reaktionen aus der muslimischen Welt zeigen, daß der Papst das richtige Thema angeschnitten hat."

The complete speech in original German words can be found here:
http://www.faz.net/s/RubBF7CD2794CEC4B87B47C719A68C59339/Doc~E13506B0B9C304B269D3CF78C543B2E42~ATpl~Ecommon ~Scontent.html

The English translation here:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/be...nsburg_en.html

Anyhow, there is a statement now saying that he regrets that he has been misinterpreted. Hehe, clever. That is as far as an apology for this should go - at maximum. I'm sure that many will not be satisfied with it, wanting to see him worshipping the greatness of Islam. what will come of his recommendation to translate his speech into Arabic so that Muslims themselves could form an opinion on the context he quoted in , remains to be seen. German Turks who speak German also attacked him. I think it is not only misinterpretation, but general anger that someone has put a finger on something where they are sore. I wonder why.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gizzmoe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Why didn´t he use the history of his own church to illustrate that? There would have been more than enough good examples, he didn´t have to bring Islam into it.

The reaction proves the Pope is correct, that's the point. We have clerics who believe that the expansion of faith through violence is acceptable. Would it have been better to quote Saladin? "European merchants supply the best weaponry, contributing to their own defeat."

If this belief is there, then bringing Islam into it or not is irrelevant. For someone who believes it's okay to spread his religion through violence, it doesn't matter if your mouth is shut or open. Such a cleric only wants to hear you to know if you want to convert, pay dhimmi tax or die. They do not grant you the treatment (tolerance, silence) you want to offer them and in this process you contribute to your own "defeat" if I were to quote Saladin with some leeway.

Had he used another example, would you see Christians being manouvered into massive protests? Stuff burning up? A comparison to Hitler? Would anything similar happen in Europe? You know that answer very well.

If you search for Middle Eastern newspapers in the internet you will find a daily anti-west, anti-christian, anti-semite freak show and the European reaction to this is pure disdain. However a historical quote causes a wide-spread massive uproar - smells very fishy, and it is. The Muslims aren't protesting, they are being told to protest. Once again, as in the Muhammad cartoon episode, we are witnessing a complete false theatrical display.

All of this is very important. We did not see this mobilization in the anniversary of 9/11. Not the manouvered masses on the streets, nor the piles of clerics and political figures had anything to say or any sign to display. A new precedent is being set. The more they show their organization and combined voice, the more we can demand their voice next time Muslim Iraqis kill Muslim Iraqis.

Can't take the Pope's word without wiggling like a dying cockroach, but they have nothing to say about the inter-Muslim carnage. Why is killing less of an outrage than words? If one believes violence is appropriate, then it makes sense indeed.

One day the world will wake up and understand the Peacful Religion of Islam is not so Peacfull for some.

And yet I do not see any Islam Leaders standing up and Denouncing the Violence? So basically what the pope said is true.. And the muslims are proving it yet again.

Most of us know history. And history tells us that Christians once had a Time that is vaguly familiar to todays Islam. The Dark Ages had many people burned at the stake for being Pagans etc. Most where actually Christians killed by Radicals. Its pretty scary if you think about it. After the Dark ages Christians became a little more mello to what we have today. Muslims have yet to have a Dark Age type event. I'm afraid it might be coming though.