Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:

quote:

---

Warm Regards,

Feroze H. Mithiborwala (Social Activist)
Syed Iftikhar Ahmed (Editor, Weekly Shodhan, Mumbai)
Sarfaraz Arzu (Editor, Daily Hindustan, Mumbai)
Meraj Siddiqui (Social Activist)
Hanif Lakdawala (Academic)
Muhammad Anis (Social Activist)

---

Hardly muslim leaders. If they're muslim leaders, let's hear Melanie Phillips' insight.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Luke:
the Muslim response (

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
It struck me as a rather anaemic example of committment to peace. Mohammed decides not to slaughter a group of people who are uneasy about allowing him and his followers onto their land. (I understand he later subdued them by force of arms, in any case.).

---

quote:

---

· Treaty of Hudaibiya (626 AD) was signed with the pagans of Mecca ensuring ten years of peace. Mohammad was allowed to visit Kaba along with his followers during the pilgrimage season.

......

Phase 4: Offensive war or open declaration of attack to spread Islam
This phase is the stage of open offensive war against all the unbelievers. This phase started in 630 AD after Mohammad re-entered Mecca and captured Kaba from the pagans.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Luke:
the Muslim response (

---

So, in spite of there being millions of Muslims worldwide, we are to believe there is only one 'Muslim response''?

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
Why do I suspect that a website with the URL 'tellthechildrenthetruth.com' might not be the most balanced source of information?

---

quote:

---

Phase 4: Offensive war or open declaration of attack to spread Islam



This phase is the stage of open offensive war against all the unbelievers. This phase started in 630 AD after Mohammad re-entered Mecca and captured Kaba from the pagans. This is the phase, which is currently valid for all Muslims.



Highlights

· Permission was granted by God to declare offensive war against all non-Muslims.

· Kill the pagans and humble the Jews and the Christians through Jizya tax.

· Tabuk expedition (late 630 AD) is the first war against the Christians.

· The world is divided into two houses, viz. House of Islam (Darul Islam) and the House of war (Darul Harb).

· All Muslims must fight to convert the Darul Harb into Darul Islam.

· This is the final teaching of Qur’an and so it is valid today and for future (that is, for eternity).

· Christians are included in the list of enemies (that is, the list now grows to four).

· Verse 9:5 (also called the verse of the sword) replaces all verses showing mercy, love, tolerance and forgiveness to all non-Muslims.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Myrrh:
Then do your own research.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fiddleback:
Come to think of it, I haven't heard a prominent Muslim condemn any of the recent violence or obnoxious threats made by other Muslims. But that is usual.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Apart from the fact that this man should have been arrested under the new religious hatred laws

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Myrrh:
And while you're doing it see if you can find teaching from Islam that stress equality of all regardless of beliefs.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Teufelchen:
]Can you find me a Christian text of that specific nature, to compare any Islamic one I find with?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fiddleback:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Teufelchen:
Can you find me a Christian text of that specific nature, to compare any Islamic one I find with?

---

No, but I might crash an aeroplane into your house because of your sig.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by RCD:

Again, only my opinion, but the really sad thing is that it seems to have reached the point where practically every Muslim majority country leader was compelled to criticize the Pope because everyone else was doing it; in order not to be seen as less than enthusiastic Muslims.

---

quote:

---

Why is it that Muslims, especially the so-called moderates, never stand up with similar and as much enthusiasm against the true and perpetual profaners of Islam, the Islamic terrorists who massacre Muslims themselves in the name of the same God , the Islamic extremists who legitimize the destruction of Israel and inculcate faith in the so-called Islamic “martyrdom”, while in the meantime they feel themselves dutybound to promote a sort of Islamic “holy war” against the head of the Catholic Church who legitimately expresses his evaluations concerning Islam, with respect but with just as much clarity about the diversity that naturally exists between the two religions?
<emboldening by B62>

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

How would you feel if large numbers of people were criticising 'Christians' in general for not being vociferous enough in their criticism of, say, Fred Phelps?

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by myself:
I heard a Muslim protester outside Westminster Cathedral on the news. He said that anyone who insults the prophet or Islam can expect a death sentence.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Teufelchen:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Myrrh:
And while you're doing it see if you can find teaching from Islam that stress equality of all regardless of beliefs.

---

Can you find me a Christian text of that specific nature, to compare any Islamic one I find with?

T.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fiddleback:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Teufelchen:
]Can you find me a Christian text of that specific nature, to compare any Islamic one I find with?

---

No, but I might crash an aeroplane into your house because of your sig.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by m.t-tomb:
Now make the leap to a poorly educated, angry Muslim teenager and what to do get? Sadly it seems that you get septigenarian Nuns being murdered in the street.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
The Pope is well protected, the more so after the shooting of his predecessor, but an organisation determined enough to carry it out could be hard to stop. It would be sensible for him to shelve his planned trip to Turkey.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Asia News:
And this morning, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Turkey, as planned, met in Istanbul to discuss details of the trip’s itinerary. They were joined by Mgr Piero Marini, head of the Office of Papal Liturgical Celebrations. They share the view that at this point, there is no reason to call off the visit and in fact, after reading together the statement of clarification by the Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the bishops turned their attention to details of the trip set to take place as scheduled from 28 November to 1 December.

---

He has my prayers for a safe trip.

Asia News also carries a reasonable comment by the former Iranian President Khatami:

quote:

---

Asia News:
Former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami said the full text of the Pope speech in Regensburg should be read before making any comments on its contents.

“I hope that the reports in this regard are misinterpreted as such remarks [as reported in the press] are usually made by uninformed and fanatic people but my impression of the pope was rather an educated and patient man,” Khatami said after his return to Tehran from a two-week visit to the United States.

---

quote:

---

Der Spiegel:
SPIEGEL: Do you think a dialogue on equal footing is possible?

Kasper: One cannot be naïve when engaging in this dialogue. Islam undoubtedly deserves respect. It has some things in common with Christianity, such as Abraham as a common progenitor, and the belief in only one God. But Islam developed in opposition to orthodox Christianity from the very start, and it considers itself superior to Christianity. So far, it has only been tolerant in places where it is in the minority. Where it is the majority religion, Islam does not recognize religious freedom, at least not as we understand it. Islam is a different culture. This doesn't mean that it's an inferior culture, but it is a culture that has yet to connect with the positive sides of our modern Western culture: religious freedom, human rights and equal rights for women. These shortcomings are one reason so many Muslims feel such frustration that often turns into hatred and violence against the West, which is despised as being godless and decadent. Suicide attacks are the actions of losers who have nothing left to lose. In this case, Islam serves as a mask, a cover for desperation and nihilism, but not for religion.

---

quote:

---

Vatican:
Past experience teaches us that, unfortunately, relations between Christians and Muslims have not always been marked by mutual respect and understanding. How many pages of history record battles and wars that have been waged, with both sides invoking the Name of God, as if fighting and killing, the enemy could be pleasing to him. The recollection of these sad events should fill us with shame, for we know only too well what atrocities have been committed in the name of religion.

The lessons of the past must help us to avoid repeating the same mistakes. We must seek paths of reconciliation and learn to live with respect for each other's identity. The defence of religious freedom, in this sense, is a permanent imperative, and respect for minorities is a clear sign of true civilization.

---

quote:

---

Christopher Orlet:
At the time of his reign (1391-1425) the Muslim Turks had their sights set on the empire's capital of Constantinople. In 1399, Manuel traveled to England, France, the seat of the Holy Roman Empire, and Aragon seeking assistance from the various monarchs and courts. His visit was a complete bust. The split between the Greek Orthodox and Roman churches proved too wide. Unless the Greeks agreed to join the Roman Church there would be no troops, no assistance, and the Greeks were not about to surrender their autonomy to Rome, not even to save the empire, their religion and their lives.

The result: Within a few years the Turks would take Constantinople, rename it Istanbul, and the Roman-Byzantine Empire would disappear forever from the earth. (In an ironic aside, Manuel's son Constantine, the last Byzantine-Roman emperor, was killed in battle defending the capital. Legend has it that he discarded his purple cloak and charged into the fray taking so many cuts and blows that his corpse was unrecognizable. Thus, the last Roman emperor was laid to rest in a mass grave.)

I suspect that the Pope was hoping to make the point that unless the West comes together, heals its divisions, and faces the threat of radical Islam together, it may face a similar fate as the Roman-Byzantine Empire. Naturally Benedict couldn't come right and make such a bald statement -- just as Benedict's predecessor Pope Pius XII had to be similarly circumspect during Nazi rule -- so he couched his remark in an obscure reference by a forgotten historical figure. The pope knew that he would have to apologize later for his statement, still he believed it important enough to risk it.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

<snip>
That is still for me the million dollar question - was the quote on purpose, or an absent minded gaffe of an elderly academic who is not used to world attention? It's much more interesting if it was on purpose.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

The result: Within a few years the Turks would take Constantinople, rename it Istanbul, and the Roman-Byzantine Empire would disappear forever from the earth.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alogon:

quote:

---

The result: Within a few years the Turks would take Constantinople, rename it Istanbul, and the Roman-Byzantine Empire would disappear forever from the earth.

---

Possible quibble: It appears from Wikipedia that "Constantinople" was the official name of the city until 1930. One critic on Amazon impugned the scholarship of Anne Rice in her having 18th-century Venetians call it Istanbul in her novel Cry to Heaven. However, the etymology of the word is contentious: is it a translation of "Constantinople" or does it have a different origin?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by David Gould:
From today's Telegraph

'It emerged yesterday that Scotland Yard has launched an inquiry into complaints about offensive protests by Muslim extremists outside Westminster Cathedral on Sunday. A well-known extremist, who was accompanied by scores of demonstrators from a group called Muslims of the UK, was reported to have called for the Pope to be "executed".'

When is the Government going to do something about these people.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spawn:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
To repeat what I posted - from Penguin Classic version of the Qur'an: p. 343 where Muslims are bidden to ‘fight against those who fight you’ – i.e. self-defence. Then on p. 346 self-defence is the only reason given for fighting – this time the context is unbelievers fighting Muslims with the intention of trying to make them give up Islam.

The Repentance sura is a continuation of the same context.

---

The trouble with arguing with you, Leo, on this subject is that you seem to be insisting that there is only one Islamic teaching on violence - or at least only one that can claim to be correct. Certainly it is true that many Muslim scholars claim that jihad is essentially defensive. Many have argued both in the past and present, that Jihad is both defensive and offensive. In fact some very influential Islamist thinkers - I have in mind Mawdudi and Qutb - have an exceedingly belligerent view.

I hope the self-defensive and spiritual view of jihad eventually wins the day. But this is by no means a foregone conclusion because it requires either, a retreat from literalism and a rejection of violent episodes in Islam's past (much as Christians have widely done); or alternatively an extraordinarily selective reading of the Koran and a fantastically revisionist view of history.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Scholars are now divided because the break up of the Ottoman Empire plus corrupt governments porppoed up by the USA has meant there is no one voice of leadership.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

However, it is possible to appeal to what protestant Christians call 'the plain meaning of the text.'

It is also possible to talk of 'mainstream Islam' as it is possible to talk of 'Orthodox Christianity'.

---

quote:

---

Jihad and Human Rights Today
An active ideology incompatible with universal standards of freedom and equality.By Bat Ye’or Jihad ideology separates humanity into two hostile blocs: the community of Muslims (Dar ul-Islam), and the infidel non-Muslims (Dar ul-Harb). Allah commands the Muslims to conquer the entire world in order to rule it according to Koranic law. Hence Muslims must wage a perpetual war against those infidels who refuse to submit. This is the motivation for jihad. It is based on the inequality between the community of Allah and the infidels, as was re-emphasized in the Cairo Declaration. The first is a superior group, which must rule the world; the second must submit. The current relevance of this ideology is apparent, and disturbing.

[For example, Al-Muhajiroun, an Islamist newspaper in London, published an article on January 27, 2001, which declared: ...]


Such an attitude assumes that the infidels have no rights and are totally dehumanized. It breeds hatred and contempt and has led to historical negationism, and the destruction of non-Muslim cultures. Moreover, such views are not confined to the most radical Islamists. They were confirmed in the Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the Academy of Islamic Research, held in 1968 (General Organization for Government Printing Offices, Cairo, 1968), and regularly since then by eminent Islamic scholars. These authoritative pronouncements have recapitulated the theory of jihad in a manner completely consistent with the Al-Muhajiroun statements. Link Here

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

A Critical Analysis of ‘Real Islam’. Its People, Culture, Philosophy, and Practices Yesterday and Today. by: Vernon Richards
The revered work "al-Nasikh wal-Mansukh" (The Abrogator and the Abrogated) deals in great detail with many subject matters addressed in the Qur’an wherein there appears to be some conflict or contradiction. The book goes through every sura (chapter), pointing out in full detail every verse which has been canceled, and the verse(s) which replace it. The author notes that out of 114 suras, there are only 43 which were not affected by this concept. As an example of the scope of abrogation in the Qur’an: there are 125 versus that call for tolerance and patience which have been canceled and replaced by sura 9:5: "Fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)....." and sura 5:33: "For those who do not submit to Allah their punishment is . . . execution or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet, from the opposite sides, or exile from the land".

[See: Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi, An-Nasikh wal- Mansukh, Dar al-Kotob al-'Elmeyah, birute, 1986 p.27]

Muslim activists universally fail to reveal to Westerners this major doctrine, hiding the fact that earlier conciliatory passages have been rendered null and void for over 1300 years. When Westerners discover it on their own they complain we misinterpret such writings or misapply their impact. Muslim promoters prefer to polish Islam's image by quoting the earlier abrogated Meccan passages that call for patience and forbearance. Spokespersons hide or omit Medinan passages that clearly call for killing and maiming. When hearing people explain Islam claiming the earlier more peaceful verses are dominant in Islamic philosophy, one must judge between two options; Either the presenter is completely ignorant of genuine Islamic doctrine, or he is practicing officially sanctioned Islamic deceit. The Doctrine of Abrogation

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

But there have been further protests in Iran and Indonesia while influential Qatari Muslim scholar, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, called for a day of anger against the Pope on Friday.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alogon:
What if they gave a "day of anger" and nobody came?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alogon:
[qb] [QUOTE]What if they gave a "day of anger" and nobody came?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
After homosexuality, Islam gets the most posts on this bulletin board - what are you people afraid of?

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
After homosexuality, Islam gets the most posts on this bulletin board - what are you people afraid of?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
After homosexuality, Islam gets the most posts on this bulletin board - what are you people afraid of?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by sanityman:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
After homosexuality, Islam gets the most posts on this bulletin board - what are you people afraid of?

---

Gay Moslems, of course. Why do you ask?

---

--------------------
♬♭ We're setting sail to the place on the map from which nobody has ever returned ♫♪♮
Ship of Fools-World Party

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
After homosexuality, Islam gets the most posts on this bulletin board - what are you people afraid of?

---

Don't be silly. Did you count the posts? No you didn't. Neither of those are likely to be in the top five subjects. Maybe top ten.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
After homosexuality, Islam gets the most posts on this bulletin board - what are you people afraid of?

---

Don't be silly. Did you count the posts? No you didn't. Neither of those are likely to be in the top five subjects. Maybe top ten.

---

Top 2 - there are about 70 pages about homosexuality in the Dead horses and about 6 separate strands related to Islam throughout the rest of the site

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Whabbists who are bent on world dommination seems just a tennsy winnsy more urgent in the big picture.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Callan:
So does Intelligent Design. Actually the length of that thread is largely the work of half a dozen souls and has died a death completely since Faithful Sheepdog retired hurt from his gallant, yet ultimately doomed, Thermopylae-esque defence of the Disco Institute.

Biblical Inerrancy flattered to decieve a few years ago, but turned out to be the equivalent of a grimly fought out nil-nil draw on a wet February night with Leprechaun as the scrapping right back and Psyduck as the old fashioned centre forward, never quite able to manage the decisive knock out blow, yet keeping the crowds on the edge of their seats.

Hyrdrophobia and Biblophobia, presumably.

---

and as well.

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?