Interesting read on mosque by ground zero.

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

[QUOTE="p2250"] In Islam, there's this doctrine called 'Jihad', the same doctrine that justified the 9/11 attacks. So long as Jihad is a part of Islam, Islam will always be a part of 9/11.

Mosques represent Islam and its doctinres, icnluding Jihad.

p2250

and the physical Jihad is meant as a purely defensive measure

"To those against whom war is made, permission is given [to defend themselves], because they are wronged - and verily, Allah is Most Powerful to give them victory." (22:39)

and Jihad is not simply physical violence. there is the concept of a higher and lesser jihad. the higher being to improve ones own character and person (the inner struggle), and the lesser is the physical.. Not to mention...

let me just start with this. Car bombs, suicide bombers, and the attacks of 9/11 (suicide by ramming airplanes full of passengers) all did one thing. they committed suicide. Explain to me - because at my last check, suicide was a one way ticket to Hell in Islam. not that different from Christianity's approach on the topic of suicide. I mean another quotes would be

(2:195) You shall spend in the cause of GOD; do not throw yourselves with your own hands into destruction. You shall be charitable; GOD loves the charitable.

(4:29) O you who believe, do not consume each others' properties illicitly - only mutually acceptable transactions are permitted. You shall not kill yourselves. GOD is Merciful towards you.

(4:30) Anyone who commits these transgressions, maliciously and deliberately, we will condemn him to Hell. This is easy for GOD to do. so tell me where

does this justification to use innocents to attack people while in the act sealing your own death?

It was Muhammed that gave the Catholic St. Catherine's Monastary this letter:

The Letter Reads:

This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate. No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

Link Citation Here

in the famous sword verse 9:5, these are verses given during the time of war. something that the Quran itself states to hold true to the treaties you have mutually made (in this case it was Muslims and Pagans), but if they break them and work against you then to go to war. This same verse HAS been used by radical imam's as a permission slip to attack percieved enemies (Communism, Israel, West, Other Arab/Muslim leaders they convinentily call apostates).Not to mention that these attacks call of one to commit suicide in order to achieve their goals.

[QUOTE="p2250"]

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

and the physical Jihad is meant as a purely defensive measure

"To those against whom war is made, permission is given [to defend themselves], because they are wronged - and verily, Allah is Most Powerful to give them victory." (22:39)

and Jihad is not simply physical violence. there is the concept of a higher and lesser jihad. the higher being to improve ones own character and person (the inner struggle), and the lesser is the physical.. Not to mention...

let me just start with this. Car bombs, suicide bombers, and the attacks of 9/11 (suicide by ramming airplanes full of passengers) all did one thing. they committed suicide. Explain to me - because at my last check, suicide was a one way ticket to Hell in Islam. not that different from Christianity's approach on the topic of suicide. I mean another quotes would be

(2:195) You shall spend in the cause of GOD; do not throw yourselves with your own hands into destruction. You shall be charitable; GOD loves the charitable.

(4:29) O you who believe, do not consume each others' properties illicitly - only mutually acceptable transactions are permitted. You shall not kill yourselves. GOD is Merciful towards you.

(4:30) Anyone who commits these transgressions, maliciously and deliberately, we will condemn him to Hell. This is easy for GOD to do. so tell me where

does this justification to use innocents to attack people while in the act sealing your own death?

SaudiFury

It was Muhammed that gave the Catholic St. Catherine's Monastary this letter:

The Letter Reads:

This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate. No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

Link Citation Here

in the famous sword verse 9:5, these are verses given during the time of war. something that the Quran itself states to hold true to the treaties you have mutually made (in this case it was Muslims and Pagans), but if they break them and work against you then to go to war. This same verse HAS been used by radical imam's as a permission slip to attack percieved enemies (Communism, Israel, West, Other Arab/Muslim leaders they convinentily call apostates).Not to mention that these attacks call of one to commit suicide in order to achieve their goals.

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

[QUOTE="p2250"] But would Muhammad see 9/11 as a defensive measure or not? There's some Muslims that see is as a response to American presence in the middle east, and being allies with Israel.

doom3lv

It was Muhammed that gave the Catholic St. Catherine's Monastary this letter:

The Letter Reads:

This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate. No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

Link Citation Here

in the famous sword verse 9:5, these are verses given during the time of war. something that the Quran itself states to hold true to the treaties you have mutually made (in this case it was Muslims and Pagans), but if they break them and work against you then to go to war. This same verse HAS been used by radical imam's as a permission slip to attack percieved enemies (Communism, Israel, West, Other Arab/Muslim leaders they convinentily call apostates).Not to mention that these attacks call of one to commit suicide in order to achieve their goals.

I insist that lands of Islam - having lived there myself - as being peaceful but not free countries. those being Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.

The times after the war with Pagans of Mecca started of very rough, there were numerous pagan tribes that banded together and tried to stamp out the new religion, in the hopes that they could keep onto their forefathers religion. Then there were some that held on truces and over time were assimilated into Islam. I mean considering the historical perspective of 600 AD. not burying your infant daughter in the desert and the written rights of women in Islam, it didn't take much for back then women wanting to convert over.

You can find me - i'm sure - ex-Muslims escaping from Muslim countries but there are far more Muslims leaving Muslim dominated countries to free countries precisely because it's free.

Mind you i've been called a kafir (an infidel) in Saudi myself, not only because my religious beliefs in Islam are not are rigid as the Saudi Whabbi/Hanbali school of thought, but i've been called that because they find out my mother is American and thus assume i'm also Christian.

and lastly.. you've clearly given me a site that is an Anti-Islam site.

I do say Allahu Akbar as well, but when i say it it's for when i know a friend (be he/she Muslim or not) had something great happen (marriage, a nice job), i'll say it for myself as well, and i'll say it for when a newborn child is born.

If i want to learn about Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhists, i'll learn from the eyes of their believers, not their disbelievers.

and even within that you'll find liberal, moderate, conservative, radical and secular believers.

In Islam, there's this doctrine called 'Jihad', the same doctrine that justified the 9/11 attacks. So long as Jihad is a part of Islam, Islam will always be a part of 9/11.

Mosques represent Islam and its doctinres, icnluding Jihad.

p2250

thank you. you have been by far the most sensible muslim i have spoken to.
the only question i have to ask is, the koran clearly advocates voilence and people will take it literally. so are you one of those people who does not believe everything the koran has to say?doom3lv

[QUOTE="doom3lv"]thank you. you have been by far the most sensible muslim i have spoken to.
the only question i have to ask is, the koran clearly advocates voilence and people will take it literally. so are you one of those people who does not believe everything the koran has to say?Ninja-Hippo

thank you. you have been by far the most sensible muslim i have spoken to.
the only question i have to ask is, the koran clearly advocates voilence and people will take it literally. so are you one of those people who does not believe everything the koran has to say?doom3lv

The way i view it is very much the same way the more progressive Imam's around the world explain it as well. I do not view the Quran as being a pacifist religion, it has a mixture of both, I also think these peace and war verses it's based on situational and contextual factors. I personally really disliked it when Muslims would come on (in the 90's) insisting Islam was simply a religion of peace, it's not that simple. we are not Buddhists, we don't take unjustice laying down (mind you i am not all that knowledeable about Buddhism, but historically speaking I don't see Buddhists fighting to get back Tibet). I also - peronsally - see it from the historical perspective. the physically violent ones i see in the contextual and historical lense.

While i look towards the inherently universal valued ones such like love (not just for your own kin), piety, charity, and the oness of God. To me humans inherently want to live in peace if and when they can, and i view the Quran as supplying that as well. but the Quran does not deny that there may come a time to fight, and fight only when grievous injustices have been done to you, but if you don't have to fight then don't, voice it or feel bad about it in your heart (but know this is weakest form of protest).

However with that said, with those verses being there corrupting it makes it easy....

The hadiths mentioned in that website (religion of peace) i've seen it before. I do take to some of the Hadiths myself, but not all of them. the problem is because for instance Sahih Al-Bakhahri - the most authentic and reliable ones that are argued, were collected during 800's.. for anyone. Muslim or not, who didn't get the memo. This is midevil Arabia (regardless if it's the beginning of the Islamic Golden Age), and this is 200 years AFTER the Prophet Muhammed died, AND the people who lived around him. The primary reason for it's authenticity is by several other people vouching it is authentic. Practically all the Hadiths is "Mr. X" Narrated:

But also Islamic states will argue Quran first and Hadith come second. problem is.... Haidth have A LOT more mysoginistic, crazy stuff, hateful stuff in it. some of them 'weak' some of them 'strong' but regardless they've been enjoined in the hopes of of creating this illusive Islamic state. something that was lsot (and something i argue most likely never existed). and Hadith's are quoted as THOUGH it's on the same level.

my main problem with most Muslims (and i am guilty of this sometimes) is that we get really defensive rather then trying to explain our views, and then some of us will claim to be Muslims but know very little of the texts, and what they do know is maybe just what they've heard off of television in the Middle East (radical imam's in the Middle East still do quite well).

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]

[QUOTE="doom3lv"]thank you. you have been by far the most sensible muslim i have spoken to.
the only question i have to ask is, the koran clearly advocates voilence and people will take it literally. so are you one of those people who does not believe everything the koran has to say?doom3lv

Punishments in the first 5 books of theold testament were usually for the people during that time. Do some research on the Bible before criticizing it.

[QUOTE="doom3lv"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] There is just as much violence in the bible as there is in the qur'an.

gaming25

Punishments in the first 5 books of theold testament were usually for the people during that time. Do some research on the Bible before criticizing it.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]

[QUOTE="doom3lv"]thank you. you have been by far the most sensible muslim i have spoken to.
the only question i have to ask is, the koran clearly advocates voilence and people will take it literally. so are you one of those people who does not believe everything the koran has to say?doom3lv

I think the Bible is completely wrong when it preaches intolerance, violence and I don't care to respect it for those things.
Please answer me this.
Do you think the koran is wrong for the same (or similar) teachings?doom3lv

I think it is wrong when advocates physically violent conquest, not when it is in defense. and by defense i do not mean from being offended (draw Muhammed, criticism stuff like that) i mean "were gonna round up every raghead and turn on the ovens".

and i choose to ignore and/or disagree ones that (if you find em') that preaches intolerance, and things that i view as unjustifiable. God gave me a brain, and i freely practice itijihad (free interpretation of the Quran) and Fikrah (innate sense of right and wrong).

and when i die and go to Judgement Day, i'll stand before God as having being honost, and i guess it'll be up to Him to do with me as he wishes then, but He gave me a mind and choices.

[QUOTE="doom3lv"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] There is just as much violence in the bible as there is in the qur'an.

bigdcstile

[QUOTE="doom3lv"]I think the Bible is completely wrong when it preaches intolerance, violence and I don't care to respect it for those things.
Please answer me this.
Do you think the koran is wrong for the same (or similar) teachings?SaudiFury

I think it is wrong when advocates physically violent conquest, not when it is in defense. and by defense i do not mean from being offended (draw Muhammed, criticism stuff like that) i mean "were gonna round up every raghead and turn on the ovens".

and i choose to ignore and/or disagree ones that (if you find em') that preaches intolerance, and things that i view as unjustifiable. God gave me a brain, and i freely practice itijihad (free interpretation of the Quran) and Fikrah (innate sense of right and wrong).

and when i die and go to Judgement Day, i'll stand before God as having being honost, and i guess it'll be up to Him to do with me as he wishes then, but He gave me a mind and choices.

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

[QUOTE="doom3lv"]I think the Bible is completely wrong when it preaches intolerance, violence and I don't care to respect it for those things.
Please answer me this.
Do you think the koran is wrong for the same (or similar) teachings?doom3lv

I think it is wrong when advocates physically violent conquest, not when it is in defense. and by defense i do not mean from being offended (draw Muhammed, criticism stuff like that) i mean "were gonna round up every raghead and turn on the ovens".

and i choose to ignore and/or disagree ones that (if you find em') that preaches intolerance, and things that i view as unjustifiable. God gave me a brain, and i freely practice itijihad (free interpretation of the Quran) and Fikrah (innate sense of right and wrong).

and when i die and go to Judgement Day, i'll stand before God as having being honost, and i guess it'll be up to Him to do with me as he wishes then, but He gave me a mind and choices.

and a wife can murder her husband and claim self-defense, that doesn't always mean it's true.

A group of thugs rob a bank and can claim they were feeding the homeless and their poor families, that doesn't mean it's true.

Last time i checked as well, it was America who came to the rescue for their Arab allies in the Gulf War, and it was America who fought in the Kosovo war, who helped stop the genocide against Muslims (and Serbs - but the US media did downplayed Serbs getting killed by Muslims). It was America that managed to get Israel's conservative Likud member Menachim Begin to agree to peace with Egypt, and it was America who brokered the peace between Israel and Jordan.

We may have problems with US foreign policy,

but this claim of self defense is BS. he and others can claim it all they like but it doesn't change the fact that they endorsed 19 guys to kill themselves, while murdering 3000 people, some of whom were also OTHER Muslims - who were working in the WTC at the time of the attack.

That isn't self defense.

That is murder.

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

[QUOTE="doom3lv"]Here is my stand on it:
I dont take the bible literally. I use common sense and I dont believe that gay people should be put to death despite what the old testament says. I think the bible is WRONG when it preaches violence.
Now, tell me, do you think the koran is wrong?doom3lv

Punishments in the first 5 books of theold testament were usually for the people during that time. Do some research on the Bible before criticizing it.

"I dont take it literally"

It doesnt matter whether or not you took it literally, the fact is that the punishments in the first five book of the Bible were only for those times. And for your other comment,I dont think that the koran condones killing of innocent civilians, and if you want to bring up self defense, thats how everyone in the world functions, not just Islam.

[QUOTE="doom3lv"][QUOTE="gaming25"]

Punishments in the first 5 books of theold testament were usually for the people during that time. Do some research on the Bible before criticizing it.

gaming25

"I dont take it literally"

It doesnt matter whether or not you took it literally, the fact is that the punishments in the first five book of the Bible were only for those times. And for your other comment,I dont think that the koran condones killing of innocent civilians, and if you want to bring up self defense, thats how everyone in the world functions, not just Islam.

[QUOTE="doom3lv"][QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

I think it is wrong when advocates physically violent conquest, not when it is in defense. and by defense i do not mean from being offended (draw Muhammed, criticism stuff like that) i mean "were gonna round up every raghead and turn on the ovens".

and i choose to ignore and/or disagree ones that (if you find em') that preaches intolerance, and things that i view as unjustifiable. God gave me a brain, and i freely practice itijihad (free interpretation of the Quran) and Fikrah (innate sense of right and wrong).

and when i die and go to Judgement Day, i'll stand before God as having being honost, and i guess it'll be up to Him to do with me as he wishes then, but He gave me a mind and choices.

SaudiFury

and a wife can murder her husband and claim self-defense, that doesn't always mean it's true.

A group of thugs rob a bank and can claim they were feeding the homeless and their poor families, that doesn't mean it's true.

Last time i checked as well, it was America who came to the rescue for their Arab allies in the Gulf War, and it was America who fought in the Kosovo war, who helped stop the genocide against Muslims (and Serbs - but the US media did downplayed Serbs getting killed by Muslims). It was America that managed to get Israel's conservative Likud member Menachim Begin to agree to peace with Egypt, and it was America who brokered the peace between Israel and Jordan.

We may have problems with US foreign policy,

but this claim of self defense is BS. he and others can claim it all they like but it doesn't change the fact that they endorsed 19 guys to kill themselves, while murdering 3000 people, some of whom were also OTHER Muslims - who were working in the WTC at the time of the attack.

That isn't self defense.

That is murder.

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

[QUOTE="doom3lv"] So...
As self defense it is OK to inflict violence according to islam, right?
Now Osama Bin LAden claimed self defense and true Jihad for the attacks of 9/11. So does it make it OK? After all, again, self defense is interpretation, right?doom3lv

and a wife can murder her husband and claim self-defense, that doesn't always mean it's true.

A group of thugs rob a bank and can claim they were feeding the homeless and their poor families, that doesn't mean it's true.

Last time i checked as well, it was America who came to the rescue for their Arab allies in the Gulf War, and it was America who fought in the Kosovo war, who helped stop the genocide against Muslims (and Serbs - but the US media did downplayed Serbs getting killed by Muslims). It was America that managed to get Israel's conservative Likud member Menachim Begin to agree to peace with Egypt, and it was America who brokered the peace between Israel and Jordan.

We may have problems with US foreign policy,

but this claim of self defense is BS. he and others can claim it all they like but it doesn't change the fact that they endorsed 19 guys to kill themselves, while murdering 3000 people, some of whom were also OTHER Muslims - who were working in the WTC at the time of the attack.

That isn't self defense.

That is murder.

don't bother?

go tell that to Muslim families in the West or the Middle East who've been affected by Islamic terrorism. It's not like i'd say "oh well at least Khalid is in Heaven now" yeah. i'd want my brother in Heaven regardless, but i'd be pissed off as hell and want heads to roll for the crime.

the literal would be to swallow both as right, the politically correct way would be to choose peaceful and ignore. negate war verses, and the politically incorrect way would be negate the peaceful and endorse the war verses. which interpretation do you think is right? I frankly think it's open to interpretation it's up to the person reading and comprehending it to decide what he believes or not.

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

[QUOTE="doom3lv"]So be it. I still don't think its right to practice those teachings in this time and I dont take it literally.
I want to know if the muslims, especially the moderate ones, take the koran literally or not.
if not, do you think its wrong to preach those things in this day and age?doom3lv

"I dont take it literally"

It doesnt matter whether or not you took it literally, the fact is that the punishments in the first five book of the Bible were only for those times. And for your other comment,I dont think that the koran condones killing of innocent civilians, and if you want to bring up self defense, thats how everyone in the world functions, not just Islam.

What does that have to do with their religion?

[QUOTE="doom3lv"][QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

and a wife can murder her husband and claim self-defense, that doesn't always mean it's true.

A group of thugs rob a bank and can claim they were feeding the homeless and their poor families, that doesn't mean it's true.

Last time i checked as well, it was America who came to the rescue for their Arab allies in the Gulf War, and it was America who fought in the Kosovo war, who helped stop the genocide against Muslims (and Serbs - but the US media did downplayed Serbs getting killed by Muslims). It was America that managed to get Israel's conservative Likud member Menachim Begin to agree to peace with Egypt, and it was America who brokered the peace between Israel and Jordan.

We may have problems with US foreign policy,

but this claim of self defense is BS. he and others can claim it all they like but it doesn't change the fact that they endorsed 19 guys to kill themselves, while murdering 3000 people, some of whom were also OTHER Muslims - who were working in the WTC at the time of the attack.

That isn't self defense.

That is murder.

SaudiFury

don't bother?

go tell that to Muslim families in the West or the Middle East who've been affected by Islamic terrorism. It's not like i'd say "oh well at least Khalid is in Heaven now" yeah. i'd want my brother in Heaven regardless, but i'd be pissed off as hell and want heads to roll for the crime.

the literal would be to swallow both as right, the politically correct way would be to choose peaceful and ignore. negate war verses, and the politically incorrect way would be negate the peaceful and endorse the war verses. which interpretation do you think is right? I frankly think it's open to interpretation it's up to the person reading and comprehending it to decide what he believes or not.

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

[QUOTE="doom3lv"] dont bother with the other muslims in WTC arguement. we already established that according to the koran (or certain interpretation of it) they are all going to heaven and their death is just cause.
as for calling it murder, which is really is. I am going to say, how is it possible that there are completely opposite interpretations of the same verses in the koran?
both cant be right. both cant be wrong. obviously, one is right and the other is wrong.
so which interpretation is right? the politically correct interpretation or the literal translation?doom3lv

don't bother?

go tell that to Muslim families in the West or the Middle East who've been affected by Islamic terrorism. It's not like i'd say "oh well at least Khalid is in Heaven now" yeah. i'd want my brother in Heaven regardless, but i'd be pissed off as hell and want heads to roll for the crime.

the literal would be to swallow both as right, the politically correct way would be to choose peaceful and ignore. negate war verses, and the politically incorrect way would be negate the peaceful and endorse the war verses. which interpretation do you think is right? I frankly think it's open to interpretation it's up to the person reading and comprehending it to decide what he believes or not.

No i don't think he is right, but i know he thinks he's certain he is right.

and i've already told you what i think.

[QUOTE="doom3lv"][QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

don't bother?

go tell that to Muslim families in the West or the Middle East who've been affected by Islamic terrorism. It's not like i'd say "oh well at least Khalid is in Heaven now" yeah. i'd want my brother in Heaven regardless, but i'd be pissed off as hell and want heads to roll for the crime.

the literal would be to swallow both as right, the politically correct way would be to choose peaceful and ignore. negate war verses, and the politically incorrect way would be negate the peaceful and endorse the war verses. which interpretation do you think is right? I frankly think it's open to interpretation it's up to the person reading and comprehending it to decide what he believes or not.

SaudiFury

No i don't think he is right, but i know he thinks he's certain he is right.

and i've already told you what i think.

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

[QUOTE="doom3lv"] which interpretation do i think is right???!!! WTF!!
good god, so you are suggesting, that osama bin laden's interpretation is right?? wow...doom3lv

No i don't think he is right, but i know he thinks he's certain he is right.

and i've already told you what i think.

far more threatening? no.

people don't live in a bubble with religion being the only pull/push factor on peoples lives.

political situation, overall quality of life (i'd argue this has a lot more to do with whether people get more religiously more fundamentalist or not), cultural, perceived/ or real injustices, and autocratic governments don't help either..

Osama Bin Laden comes from the second most wealthiest family in Saudi Arabia (seconded by the Saud family). and he is definitely the black sheep in his family, his own son has dread locks and married to a middle age British woman. the father that built the family to what it is now Mohammed Bin Laden, literally lived the quintessential American dream.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Snipes_2"]

I find it funny how on Gun Rights and stuff the constitution needs to be revised etc...Yet this Constitutional right is awesome.

Snipes_2

Wait, what?

[QUOTE="doom3lv"][QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

No i don't think he is right, but i know he thinks he's certain he is right.

and i've already told you what i think.

SaudiFury

far more threatening? no.

[QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

[QUOTE="doom3lv"]so here is the bottomline, reading the koran can make you violent. right?
of course reading the bible could too, but the effects of islam ON PEOPLE seem to be far more threatening, would you agree?doom3lv

far more threatening? no.

Considering the fact that i've met real life fundamentalists in Saudi, I remember as a kid in my house the earth shaking when the terrorist blew up the Al-Khobar towers in 1996.

Show me the quote in the Quran to deface women, to knock off their noses, or throw acid in their face. show me the verse!

are there certain parts of the Quran that CAN seem to give Muslims an excuse to be violent? YES

just as if you want can find it in the Bible, Torah or any religious text that has a concept of defense within it.

Does that mean that 1% of Muslims are terrorist? NO. consider the Muslim number to be 1.25 billion people, 1% would be 1,250,000 people are terrorist? does Al-Qaeda or any number of Muslim terror groups have that much following? what about 1% of Muslims living in the United States? ok for sake of argument lets take the highest estimate 7 million (as perdicted by CAIR), that would mean 70,000 people in the US RIGHT NOW are actually certifiable terrorists. what are they waiting for a signal? The call to attack America has gone out SEVERAL TIMES.

.....................

Look i'm Muslim, and my family, and my friends are walking living breathing examples of civil citizens of the West. your looking for me to say "yes that is true, therefore we ought to be treated as second ****citizens" and i'm not gonna give it to you. I'm a Mechanical Engineer, i'm doing a Masters, i'm fluent in English and Arabic, and i have conversational level in Spanish. I'm Saudi and American, and i don't agree with Sharia law, and i'm a Muslim. I'm moderate-liberal, socially liberal. I love traveling the world, avid video gamer, Marvel comic fan but i also like Green Lantern and Batman, i occasionally swear, i don't drink nor eat pig, i love Sci-Fi, some high fantasy. I wish there was religious freedom in the Muslim world, i wish there was freedom of speech, and a United Arab Union (similar to the EU).

i'm Muslim and because Terrorist who attacked this country exploited the war verses to commit murder in 'self defense'. I'm sorry for terrorist attacks by Muslims, but they don't represent me, and they don't represent my family or Muslim friends.

the first amendment states religious freedom, and if your willing out of fear of security to deny your fellow citizens their rights then i got a cool quote by Ben Franklin (that was believed to be said) "That they can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"

It's been nice talking with you, but i have literally spent my entire day talking to you, and i've already written a few pages worth of my position and views. You ought to be able to find an answer to a question you'll inevitably accuse me of (in duplicity and excusing terrorist actions).

[QUOTE="doom3lv"][QUOTE="SaudiFury"]

far more threatening? no.

SaudiFury

Considering the fact that i've met real life fundamentalists in Saudi, I remember as a kid in my house the earth shaking when the terrorist blew up the Al-Khobar towers in 1996.

Show me the quote in the Quran to deface women, to knock off their noses, or throw acid in their face. show me the verse!

are there certain parts of the Quran that CAN seem to give Muslims an excuse to be violent? YES

just as if you want can find it in the Bible, Torah or any religious text that has a concept of defense within it.

Does that mean that 1% of Muslims are terrorist? NO. consider the Muslim number to be 1.25 billion people, 1% would be 1,250,000 people are terrorist? does Al-Qaeda or any number of Muslim terror groups have that much following? what about 1% of Muslims living in the United States? ok for sake of argument lets take the highest estimate 7 million (as perdicted by CAIR), that would mean 70,000 people in the US RIGHT NOW are actually certifiable terrorists. what are they waiting for a signal? The call to attack America has gone out SEVERAL TIMES.

.....................

Look i'm Muslim, and my family, and my friends are walking living breathing examples of civil citizens of the West. your looking for me to say "yes that is true, therefore we ought to be treated as second ****citizens" and i'm not gonna give it to you. I'm a Mechanical Engineer, i'm doing a Masters, i'm fluent in English and Arabic, and i have conversational level in Spanish. I'm Saudi and American, and i don't agree with Sharia law, and i'm a Muslim. I'm moderate-liberal, socially liberal. I love traveling the world, avid video gamer, Marvel comic fan but i also like Green Lantern and Batman, i occasionally swear, i don't drink nor eat pig, i love Sci-Fi, some high fantasy. I wish there was religious freedom in the Muslim world, i wish there was freedom of speech, and a United Arab Union (similar to the EU).

i'm Muslim and because Terrorist who attacked this country exploited the war verses to commit murder in 'self defense'. I'm sorry for terrorist attacks by Muslims, but they don't represent me, and they don't represent my family or Muslim friends.

the first amendment states religious freedom, and if your willing out of fear of security to deny your fellow citizens their rights then i got a cool quote by Ben Franklin (that was believed to be said) "That they can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"

It's been nice talking with you, but i have literally spent my entire day talking to you, and i've already written a few pages worth of my position and views. You ought to be able to find an answer to a question you'll inevitably accuse me of (in duplicity and excusing terrorist actions).

John Paul II was great.

He definitely would've been a great help.

[QUOTE="Treflis"]And you know for a fact the Mosque will have a Imam with radical ideas? Or are the ideals radical because they are different from, say, Christian ideals?airshocker

I'd say anybody who won't denounce Hamas as being a terrorist organization is radical. I'd also say anybody who calls the US an accessary to 9/11 is a radical.

Lastly, I don't practice a religion.

If you actually look into the issue you will understand why they won't.. Because to do so would be to prop up the Israeli government.. Something that the majority do not support.. And fully believe that the Hamas are defending themselves from a encroaching power that to this day is invading onto land that is not theirs.. Its very complicated subject that isn't black and white.

Just so you know, the reason I oppose the spread of islam in the US is because trends show that they almost always demand special legislation, especially in communities where they are growing in number.
"In August 2008 the council met stern protest for asking the European Fatwa Council to decide on the death penalty for homosexuality. The Minister of Children and Equality felt this to be "unacceptable", while the Speaker of the Norwegian Parliament asked to stop all financial support immediately.[10][11][12] Homosexual and lesbian activist groups protested against the council's request.[10][13]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Norway
"In 2006 Mahmoud Aldebe, one of the Board members of SMR, sent letters to each of the major political parties in Sweden demanding special legislation for Muslims in Sweden, including the right to specific Islamic holidays, special public financing for the building of Mosques, that all divorces between Muslim couples be approved by an Imam, and that Imams should be allowed to teach Islam to Muslim children in public schools"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Sweden
Popular vote:
In a survey conducted by Taylor Nelson Sofres on behalf of the UK-based right wing think tank Open Europe in March 2007, 56% of the Swedish respondents agreed with the statement that "Islamic fundamentalism is a serious threat for our country".[14]
The thing is, muslims are OK, but I dont approve giving them special laws in this country. And with the left looking to please the muslims so much, you never know. this might happen and it would be too late to stop it. doom3lv

You don't say a religion demanding specific legislation? Where have I heard this.. Oh thats right, in just about every religion known to man... The fact gays can't marry in most states, is due to religious beliefs.. That sounds awfully like a infringement of secular ideas.. In the end all religions try to infringe into secular government for obvious reasons.. This isn't dissing religion, but its a common trait in all systems..

Just so you know, the reason I oppose the spread of islam in the US is because trends show that they almost always demand special legislation, especially in communities where they are growing in number.
"In August 2008 the council met stern protest for asking the European Fatwa Council to decide on the death penalty for homosexuality. The Minister of Children and Equality felt this to be "unacceptable", while the Speaker of the Norwegian Parliament asked to stop all financial support immediately.[10][11][12] Homosexual and lesbian activist groups protested against the council's request.[10][13]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Norway
"In 2006 Mahmoud Aldebe, one of the Board members of SMR, sent letters to each of the major political parties in Sweden demanding special legislation for Muslims in Sweden, including the right to specific Islamic holidays, special public financing for the building of Mosques, that all divorces between Muslim couples be approved by an Imam, and that Imams should be allowed to teach Islam to Muslim children in public schools"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Sweden
Popular vote:
In a survey conducted by Taylor Nelson Sofres on behalf of the UK-based right wing think tank Open Europe in March 2007, 56% of the Swedish respondents agreed with the statement that "Islamic fundamentalism is a serious threat for our country".[14]
The thing is, muslims are OK, but I dont approve giving them special laws in this country. And with the left looking to please the muslims so much, you never know. this might happen and it would be too late to stop it. doom3lv

[QUOTE="thattotally"]

Because Muslims certainly weren't also victims of the 9/11 crash... NOT TO MENTION THE EVENTS AFTERWARDS.

But naturally none know of the cases that happened to people of Middle Eastern heritage and the stuff they endured that would make anyone's blood boil.

My gosh... you know I once saw this clip about how a restaurant in some part of the US... well the people there they don't mind black folks per se... I mean they don't put on white ghost costumes and lynch them but... they just don't want any black people eating at their joint, the place they go to rest every single evening. It's the best thing to look forward to after a hard day's work.

So is it so much to ask for black people to consider the sensitivity and bull bull bull blah blah oh-my-gosh-I-can't-believe-what-I'm-reading-is-it-2010-or-am-I-missing-something bull.

Also... I hope you know why terrorists and poor uneducated saps who join such organizations show such disdain towards the West and US... learn your history. When you're poor and uneducated you don't really let things go when your oppressors and back stabbers are flourishing. Just saying.

face_ripper

Yeah, that is all over the place.

what about christians getting special laws?? proposition 8? pro-life laws? its all heavily christian and it is effecting the laws of a nation that isnt only christian.curtkobain

Also... I hope you know why terrorists and poor uneducated saps who join such organizations show such disdain towards the West and US... learn your history. When you're poor and uneducated you don't really let things go when your oppressors and back stabbers are flourishing. Just saying. thattotally