This is completely moronic. You are holding a man up for censor because he quoted something disagreeing with something? Everyone do not have an opinion or you are an evil person!I'll ask you this.. What has the nation Of Islam done for the world? Have they helped the less fortunate or the sick or infirmed?Has the Catholic Church?Pointing out the horrible stuff the Catholic Church when everyone thought the world was flat and bathing was a no no does not make you clever....
Quote: "I'm sick of violent reaction to any critical comment of Islamic radicals. It's scary as hell. It's almost time to kick these bastards' arses."This is exactly the kind of American-macho-bull that makes the USA so unpopular at this time. You are sick of being attacked but can resort to nothing else than violence yourself, not even stopping to think that the OTHER may be sick of YOUR attacks. Shoot first, ask questions later is not the way to world peace, ya know. The Pope should watch his dirty mouth and check his OWN people's history FIRST. WHO spread his faith by the sword?! Mohammed? Ever heard of the crusades? Both Islam and Christianity as well as Judaïsm and probably all other religions who THINK there's only ONE GOD are despicable religions who are not even capable of accepting the OTHER as he is. Try Buddhism, Buddhists don't have any problems with people who disagree and don't create any fuss if you think differently. How could these religions of love and peace be SO intolerant and absolutely without doubt that they should be mistaken. Give me a break and start thinking for yourself, your soul will be grateful for it later. Doubt is very important in life, probably/maybe even more important after life, so think twice and KEEP ALL OPTIONS OPEN!
@ObvioustrollExactly. It really is to bad that they had to do it in the name of God without making sure that they were acting like God would want them to though...I really dislike people that say they are followers of someone, without acting like the person they say they are following.
You know, given the state of affairs in the Middle East, it seems kinda planned out that the Pope would throw gasoline onto the Islamic state fires. The last thing you want to do as a religious leader is even mention Mohammed, particularly in the context of being wrong or violent. From the outset it seems very irresponsible, but take a closer look and you can see the logic. 1. Piss the Islamic world off yet again 2. Increase terrorism 3. Cultivate an us-vs-them mentality worldwide 4. WWIII I honestly think that the next serious world war is going to break out in the next 10 years. You can only whack the beehive with a shovel so many times before the bees attack full force. It's like the crusades all over again, only this time the weapons are much more devastating and alot more is at stake. Can't we, as humans, just not agree to disagree? s**t.
@ronaldst: Actually Hitler *wasn't* working towards that goal. He had a scientology remix under his belt, with himself and the State at the top. Read some history books or even Mein Kampf for some insight. He realized that the most powerful control mechanism is one that eludes reason, such as belief in fictitious beings or things that are impossible to understand. If you think God is always watching you, you won't sin, presumably..same goes with the Germans under the iron fist of the Gestapo.
@ccran Islam itself is a perfect moderation. Every Muslim who strives to practice Islam correctly, als strives to be moderate. But!For most of non-believers, moderation means direct contradiction to what Islam teaches us: Islam teaches us different gender roles in society, appropriate dress code for men and women, prohibition of adultery, fornication and sodomy, strict punishment for immoral actions. This is unacceptable to Muslims. This is not moderation, but denying the words of Allah. Typical example of moderates to non-believers are San Diego professor supporting Israel, a woman leading a mixed congregation prayer, a Muslim that publicly bashes and condemns other Muslims, a Muslim that dines with the President that devastated Muslim countries, a Muslim man that shakes hands with un-related woman. Those are not moderates, those are people who either made mistakes or, if acting consciously, deviating from Islam.Au contraire, for Muslims moderation means strictly acting by commands of Allah, that is not by our emotions, not to please anybody else in this world or to serve self-righteous feelings. When angered, keep acting just, like Hezret 'Ali did, when the subdued enemy on the battlefield spit in his face (he immediately released him, because killing him would be acting based on anger, not on justice). When provoked, act with restraint, with thinking. Those are two different moderations. To me - religion, and to you [different] religion (Holy Qur'an, Al-Kafiroon).So am I moderate to you now or not? /rhetorical
More reams of wiki:<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sassanid_Empire">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sassanid_Empire</a>Before the advent of Islam, the superpowers of the middleEast was Christian Byzantium and Zarastruran Persia (Sassanids, modern Iran), bording on Euphrates. Both drew heavily from Hellenic Roman cultures, in addition to Christianity to native Persian culture respectively, were both rich, literate and advanced.Then Islam came from the Arabian desert, in 100 years, on the Byzantine side, formerly christian Turkey/Syria became forever Islamic, Islam also took over vast north Africa, soon taking over Spain and continuously raiding other European frontiers over the next few hundred years. Culminating in the Fall of Constatinople, a Christian city born, and a Christian city for a thousand years.I will give Islam the credit of being preferentially tolerant of Christians and Jews, except for poll tax and *local episodic* persecution. That sounds pretty good, until you realize, even Nazi genocide in the backdrop of long history was only an "local episode". And other religions weren't so lucky.On the Persian side, Islam took over, Persian language was forbidden, Zoroastrians were slaughtered, Zoroastrianism went from being the religion of entire Persia to the religion of a few thousands exiled in India. The fact is, for its first thousand years, this "religion of peace" threatened Europe and all in its path. While the destruction of church of Holy sepultre by Hakim, an extremist, may have directly precipitated Crusade, the ultimate cause of Crusades was the longterm Islamic threat.
The caliphate that took the sassanid empire, ended in the mid 600's. I really find it hard to believe that it would take 400 years for this large and menacing threat, to all of a sudden become a danger to europe and to cause the crusades. If they were hellbent on taking over that europe 400 years would have been adequate time. The fact here is that these extremist even for the most part have no problem with christians or jews it is just that they seek to have islamic states in thier (so called) homeland.
go back and reread the history, within 100 years, 600-700, Muslim armies were occupying NorthAfrica and Spain, conducting raids into France, kicking Byzantine out of MiddleEast, commiting "genocide" and cultural genocide against Zorostruthian Persia. No, they are not the same caliphate, but they shared a religion and an army to back it up. Then during the next 600 years, Islam succeeded in converting the entire Central Asia, while the pressure on Europe was most kept on Byzantium on the East (Crusaders tried to help Byzantium in their crude/counter productive way, but had limited success). Eventually, Islamic Turks succeeded and occupied former Byzantium, including Greece and Balkans, including Constantinople. > I really find it hard to believe that it would take 400 years for this large and menacing threat, to all of a sudden become a danger to europe and to cause the crusades.This argument is incredibly fallacious. Islam was not an united entity from the very start. There were times they were strong/united, times they were weak, occasionally they met their match in the most barbaric of all, Mongols. But Islam was no Mongol, which came and went merely for pillaging, murder and fun. Islam not only exploded like a supernova, it also had staying power. It had its own holy cities Mecca and Medina, but occupied the holiest city of Christianity and Judaism, sometimes allowed worship, sometimes disallowed; sometimes was lenient, other times persecuting. Whether Crusades were good or bad is another matter, but Christianity was right to feel threatened by Islam. I
Finally some-one on line who understands HISTORY...!Yes, Christianity has its own bloody past (more so in its conquest of the Americias for greed and power actually..), but in any reading of Islam's history was not spread throughout the world not through peace, but through the sword...Ive visited some of the countries that Islam conquored..where actually Christendom was the ruling religion for centuries... Turkey (where the ancient churches are now Mosques, and where there are few Christians or Jews left today..)..and where they butchered 1,200,000 to 1,500,000 Armenian Christians...Cyprus (where the Turkish desecration of Greek churches is still going on..)But even more so...read the ancient history of all of the lands that Islam later conquored..Persia - Where the Zooastrians were slaughtered and an empire crushed..India-Where millions were butchered by the invading Muslism armies...Eastern Christendom (i.e. The Slavic countries) and their century long battles with invading Moors..Spain and its own conquest....France and its battles Yes the Crusades were a bloody mess (and they killed many Christians & Jews - both for profit and for slaughter), but to pretend that they were not a reaction to earlier Islamic invasion, conquest (and slaughters) is to ignore the well researched history of that era...And it also ignores that those very countries were for centuries prior to this some of the Jewels of an earlier Christian Empire centered in Turkey (actually Constantinople..)Islam MAY be interpreted as peace to some of its recent more enlightened followers....but they are hardly the people in power today, not at any point in Islam's past....nor are they the people fighting Islamic wars & repressing & slaughtering Dimmis [non-muslims, like in Suddan with 300,000 dead..!] & commiting terrorist acts the world over..Nor are they the people in power in Saudia Arabia...where even the practice (let alone the conversion to) other religions is banned....it is their ACTIONS we should listen to...and the actions of Historyand those speak very loudly indeed...and the word one hears is far from "Peace be upon you..."QED
obkenobiSep 18, 2006
If it hadn't been for Islam and the Communists, Pope Palpatine would rule the world by now. I'm sure he's still upset about that.
volatilewhimsySep 19, 2006
This is completely moronic. You are holding a man up for censor because he quoted something disagreeing with something? Everyone do not have an opinion or you are an evil person!I'll ask you this.. What has the nation Of Islam done for the world? Have they helped the less fortunate or the sick or infirmed?Has the Catholic Church?Pointing out the horrible stuff the Catholic Church when everyone thought the world was flat and bathing was a no no does not make you clever....
jerichopSep 19, 2006
Quote: "I'm sick of violent reaction to any critical comment of Islamic radicals. It's scary as hell. It's almost time to kick these bastards' arses."This is exactly the kind of American-macho-bull that makes the USA so unpopular at this time. You are sick of being attacked but can resort to nothing else than violence yourself, not even stopping to think that the OTHER may be sick of YOUR attacks. Shoot first, ask questions later is not the way to world peace, ya know. The Pope should watch his dirty mouth and check his OWN people's history FIRST. WHO spread his faith by the sword?! Mohammed? Ever heard of the crusades? Both Islam and Christianity as well as Judaïsm and probably all other religions who THINK there's only ONE GOD are despicable religions who are not even capable of accepting the OTHER as he is. Try Buddhism, Buddhists don't have any problems with people who disagree and don't create any fuss if you think differently. How could these religions of love and peace be SO intolerant and absolutely without doubt that they should be mistaken. Give me a break and start thinking for yourself, your soul will be grateful for it later. Doubt is very important in life, probably/maybe even more important after life, so think twice and KEEP ALL OPTIONS OPEN!
take2podcastSep 19, 2006
....... "Apologize for calling me violent or Ill kill you" ... Huh?
andyd273Sep 19, 2006
@ObvioustrollExactly. It really is to bad that they had to do it in the name of God without making sure that they were acting like God would want them to though...I really dislike people that say they are followers of someone, without acting like the person they say they are following.
Closed AccountSep 19, 2006
You know, given the state of affairs in the Middle East, it seems kinda planned out that the Pope would throw gasoline onto the Islamic state fires. The last thing you want to do as a religious leader is even mention Mohammed, particularly in the context of being wrong or violent. From the outset it seems very irresponsible, but take a closer look and you can see the logic. 1. Piss the Islamic world off yet again 2. Increase terrorism 3. Cultivate an us-vs-them mentality worldwide 4. WWIII I honestly think that the next serious world war is going to break out in the next 10 years. You can only whack the beehive with a shovel so many times before the bees attack full force. It's like the crusades all over again, only this time the weapons are much more devastating and alot more is at stake. Can't we, as humans, just not agree to disagree? s**t.
Closed AccountSep 19, 2006
@ronaldst: Actually Hitler *wasn't* working towards that goal. He had a scientology remix under his belt, with himself and the State at the top. Read some history books or even Mein Kampf for some insight. He realized that the most powerful control mechanism is one that eludes reason, such as belief in fictitious beings or things that are impossible to understand. If you think God is always watching you, you won't sin, presumably..same goes with the Germans under the iron fist of the Gestapo.
mapkinaseSep 20, 2006
@ccran Islam itself is a perfect moderation. Every Muslim who strives to practice Islam correctly, als strives to be moderate. But!For most of non-believers, moderation means direct contradiction to what Islam teaches us: Islam teaches us different gender roles in society, appropriate dress code for men and women, prohibition of adultery, fornication and sodomy, strict punishment for immoral actions. This is unacceptable to Muslims. This is not moderation, but denying the words of Allah. Typical example of moderates to non-believers are San Diego professor supporting Israel, a woman leading a mixed congregation prayer, a Muslim that publicly bashes and condemns other Muslims, a Muslim that dines with the President that devastated Muslim countries, a Muslim man that shakes hands with un-related woman. Those are not moderates, those are people who either made mistakes or, if acting consciously, deviating from Islam.Au contraire, for Muslims moderation means strictly acting by commands of Allah, that is not by our emotions, not to please anybody else in this world or to serve self-righteous feelings. When angered, keep acting just, like Hezret 'Ali did, when the subdued enemy on the battlefield spit in his face (he immediately released him, because killing him would be acting based on anger, not on justice). When provoked, act with restraint, with thinking. Those are two different moderations. To me - religion, and to you [different] religion (Holy Qur'an, Al-Kafiroon).So am I moderate to you now or not? /rhetorical
flabbergastSep 20, 2006
More reams of wiki:<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sassanid_Empire">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sassanid_Empire</a>Before the advent of Islam, the superpowers of the middleEast was Christian Byzantium and Zarastruran Persia (Sassanids, modern Iran), bording on Euphrates. Both drew heavily from Hellenic Roman cultures, in addition to Christianity to native Persian culture respectively, were both rich, literate and advanced.Then Islam came from the Arabian desert, in 100 years, on the Byzantine side, formerly christian Turkey/Syria became forever Islamic, Islam also took over vast north Africa, soon taking over Spain and continuously raiding other European frontiers over the next few hundred years. Culminating in the Fall of Constatinople, a Christian city born, and a Christian city for a thousand years.I will give Islam the credit of being preferentially tolerant of Christians and Jews, except for poll tax and *local episodic* persecution. That sounds pretty good, until you realize, even Nazi genocide in the backdrop of long history was only an "local episode". And other religions weren't so lucky.On the Persian side, Islam took over, Persian language was forbidden, Zoroastrians were slaughtered, Zoroastrianism went from being the religion of entire Persia to the religion of a few thousands exiled in India. The fact is, for its first thousand years, this "religion of peace" threatened Europe and all in its path. While the destruction of church of Holy sepultre by Hakim, an extremist, may have directly precipitated Crusade, the ultimate cause of Crusades was the longterm Islamic threat.
staticneuronSep 21, 2006
The caliphate that took the sassanid empire, ended in the mid 600's. I really find it hard to believe that it would take 400 years for this large and menacing threat, to all of a sudden become a danger to europe and to cause the crusades. If they were hellbent on taking over that europe 400 years would have been adequate time. The fact here is that these extremist even for the most part have no problem with christians or jews it is just that they seek to have islamic states in thier (so called) homeland.
flabbergastSep 21, 2006
go back and reread the history, within 100 years, 600-700, Muslim armies were occupying NorthAfrica and Spain, conducting raids into France, kicking Byzantine out of MiddleEast, commiting "genocide" and cultural genocide against Zorostruthian Persia. No, they are not the same caliphate, but they shared a religion and an army to back it up. Then during the next 600 years, Islam succeeded in converting the entire Central Asia, while the pressure on Europe was most kept on Byzantium on the East (Crusaders tried to help Byzantium in their crude/counter productive way, but had limited success). Eventually, Islamic Turks succeeded and occupied former Byzantium, including Greece and Balkans, including Constantinople. > I really find it hard to believe that it would take 400 years for this large and menacing threat, to all of a sudden become a danger to europe and to cause the crusades.This argument is incredibly fallacious. Islam was not an united entity from the very start. There were times they were strong/united, times they were weak, occasionally they met their match in the most barbaric of all, Mongols. But Islam was no Mongol, which came and went merely for pillaging, murder and fun. Islam not only exploded like a supernova, it also had staying power. It had its own holy cities Mecca and Medina, but occupied the holiest city of Christianity and Judaism, sometimes allowed worship, sometimes disallowed; sometimes was lenient, other times persecuting. Whether Crusades were good or bad is another matter, but Christianity was right to feel threatened by Islam. I
secretsam007Oct 7, 2006
Finally some-one on line who understands HISTORY...!Yes, Christianity has its own bloody past (more so in its conquest of the Americias for greed and power actually..), but in any reading of Islam's history was not spread throughout the world not through peace, but through the sword...Ive visited some of the countries that Islam conquored..where actually Christendom was the ruling religion for centuries... Turkey (where the ancient churches are now Mosques, and where there are few Christians or Jews left today..)..and where they butchered 1,200,000 to 1,500,000 Armenian Christians...Cyprus (where the Turkish desecration of Greek churches is still going on..)But even more so...read the ancient history of all of the lands that Islam later conquored..Persia - Where the Zooastrians were slaughtered and an empire crushed..India-Where millions were butchered by the invading Muslism armies...Eastern Christendom (i.e. The Slavic countries) and their century long battles with invading Moors..Spain and its own conquest....France and its battles Yes the Crusades were a bloody mess (and they killed many Christians & Jews - both for profit and for slaughter), but to pretend that they were not a reaction to earlier Islamic invasion, conquest (and slaughters) is to ignore the well researched history of that era...And it also ignores that those very countries were for centuries prior to this some of the Jewels of an earlier Christian Empire centered in Turkey (actually Constantinople..)Islam MAY be interpreted as peace to some of its recent more enlightened followers....but they are hardly the people in power today, not at any point in Islam's past....nor are they the people fighting Islamic wars & repressing & slaughtering Dimmis [non-muslims, like in Suddan with 300,000 dead..!] & commiting terrorist acts the world over..Nor are they the people in power in Saudia Arabia...where even the practice (let alone the conversion to) other religions is banned....it is their ACTIONS we should listen to...and the actions of Historyand those speak very loudly indeed...and the word one hears is far from "Peace be upon you..."QED