Eureka! Muslims begin to reject terrorism!

[carolineislands]

Could hardly believe my eyes:

[Goat]

did you study that the universe expand, and that was reveled in coran 14 centuries ago?
did you study the big bang and that was reveled in coran 14 centuries ago?

Have you ever heard of the term 'shoe horning' and 'retrofitting'? Did you know that if you look at those passages in CONTEXT, they have nothing to do with the formation of the universe?

This is known as self deception.

[Rathpig]

This is known as self deception.

And promoting it to others is known by a much more colorful name.


Anyway mirou,

Is your final answer on the question of Islam that Muslims just don't do it right?

[mirou]

I've studied Islam. The reality of the religion is exactly what happens in Saudi Arabia and Iran. These countries are Islamic. They practice Islam as it was designed.

You are either being disingenuous or you yourself may need to study a bit deeper.

where did you find that Islam lets a man to kill his wife? where did you find that Islam lets a muslim to kill a muslim?

[Goat]

I've studied Islam. The reality of the religion is exactly what happens in Saudi Arabia and Iran. These countries are Islamic. They practice Islam as it was designed.

You are either being disingenuous or you yourself may need to study a bit deeper.

where did you find that Islam lets a man to kill his wife? where did you find that Islam lets a muslim to kill a muslim?

What is more important to me, being a non-muslim, where in islam does it allow the death of 'infidels'. Lots of that going on ..

[Rathpig]

where did you find that Islam lets a man to kill his wife? where did you find that Islam lets a muslim to kill a muslim?

Perhaps you should direct your question to the Ummah and to the Imam. The Koran is not a magic book and Islam is not a magic religion. It was all built by man and any question you have about Islam needs to be directed to the Muslims.

What I do know is that a random poster on an internet forum is much less a scholar of Islam than the resources of Saudi Arabia, so Saudi Arabia is Islam. Nothing else needs to be known.

[fried_okra]

your are talking about Muslims, not about Islam, most Islamic countries were colonized by european countries, what made illiterate persons, they don't know what's Islam, they can't read the Coran, or what said the prophete pbuh.

The specific countries I find of most concern were not colonized by European countries. Saudi Arabia, Iraq , Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, and Jordan. I also see abuses in Pakistan. That is the core of the places that have the problem with Women's rights, and with terrorism.

Forgive me for just jumping in here, and my intent is not to take sides with this post, but Iraq, Afghanistan, Syrian and Jordan have all been under European control as mandates in the past century--by the British and French, who largely controlled both Middle Eastern and North African territories.

I'm not sure what your definition of "colonized" is, but I read your response as claiming that these countries have always been autonomous, and that's just not the case. If I have misread, please correct.

[Risky]

and it is beyond dispute that the more Islamic a country is in nature the more destructive toward human rights that country will become.

Please define "Islamic" for me.

What you are essentially saying is that the majority of Muslims and the lands scared to these Muslims such as Saudi Arabia can not be held accountable because somehow they are not "Islamic". This is simply ridiculous.

I've studied Islam. The reality of the religion is exactly what happens in Saudi Arabia and Iran. These countries are Islamic. They practice Islam as it was designed.

They practice Islam as it was designed? Are you kidding me? Really look into Saudie Arabia deeper; If Saudi truly followed Islam as your telling me would they be in bed with America?

Do you think a country that followed Islam would allow Non-Muslim Army bases on their land? Esp. Saudi considering it has the two 'holy' cities so the 'holy' land with infidels? Man the thought makes my brain puzzle, how the two can be possible? Seems quite illogical if they were following 'islam'

[Rathpig]

Please define "Islamic" for me.

Having the characteristic of or the embracing of Islam.

They practice Islam as it was designed?

Yes, one could even speculate that the Saudi Kingdom is a result of Islam which only exists because of the internal combustion engine.

Really look into Saudie Arabia deeper; If Saudi truly followed Islam as your telling me would they be in bed with America?

Who prospers most from that relation?

You are also confusing the House Saud with the religious nation. All Saudis prosper from the relationship with the U.S., but the strings are pulled by House Saud. But even so nothing in Islam forbids the House Saud from profiting from the greed of the U.S. oil economy.

Do you think a country that followed Islam would allow Non-Muslim Army bases on their land? Esp. Saudi considering it has the two 'holy' cities so the 'holy' land with infidels? Man the thought makes my brain puzzle, how the two can be possible? Seems quite illogical if they were following 'islam'

Well, the U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia a extremely overstated. Islam doesn't forbid hiring mercenaries to protect Islamic interests, and frankly that is all the U.S. military has become. In all likelihood the holy cities of Islam would be under the control of the secularist Baath Party had it not been for these U.S. mercenary troops.


Even so, I have rarely encountered a Muslim who stood against Saudi Arabia as a nation. Yes, many Muslims despise the House Saud, but the excesses of Wahab and the nation Saudi are never opposed.


You will need another issue to make your point whatever that may be.

[Risky]

Well, the U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia a extremely overstated. Islam doesn't forbid hiring mercenaries to protect Islamic interests, and frankly that is all the U.S. military has become. In all likelihood the holy cities of Islam would be under the control of the secularist Baath Party had it not been for these U.S. mercenary troops.

Even so, I have rarely encountered a Muslim who stood against Saudi Arabia as a nation. Yes, many Muslims despise the House Saud, but the excesses of Wahab and the nation Saudi are never opposed.

When i referred to Saudi, i was meaning to refer to the Rulers of the land/ the ones who make the decisions. It never crossed my mind to specify i thought it would be obvious but thats only in my head. My apologies.

Well, the U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia a extremely overstated. Islam doesn't forbid hiring mercenaries to protect Islamic interests, and frankly that is all the U.S. military has become.

"Doesn't forbid hiring of mercenaries to protect Islamic interests..." But when these 'mercenaries' then go and kill thousands of civilians under Saudi pay roll? That isn't against Islam? Who effectively killed hundreds of thousands with its embargo on a 'Muslim' country, destroying the infrastructure, date palms, etc etc... I don't think Islam allows mercenaries who commit such acts to be hired.

In all likelihood the holy cities of Islam would be under the control of the secularist Baath Party had it not been for these U.S. mercenary troops.

I don't recall any plans of Saddam to invade Saudi Arabia.
________________________________________________
Human rights being wiped out in countries that implement sharia? Or bare the facade they do? What do you consider Human rights & how does sharia destroy them?

"Saudi Arabia officially considers torture illegal under Islamic Law; however, it is widely practiced, as in the case of William Sampson. According to a 2003 report by Amnesty International "Torture and ill-treatment remained rife."[51] Hanny Megally, Executive director of the Middle East and North Africa division of Human Rights Watch stated in 2002 "The practice of torture in Saudi Arabia is well-documented",[52] According to the Human Rights Watch World Report 2003 "Torture under interrogation of political prisoners and criminal suspects continued",[53] and the 2006 report notes that "Arbitrary detention, mistreatment and torture of detainees, restrictions on freedom of movement, and lack of official accountability remain serious concerns."[54]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_to ... udi_Arabia

O_O Torture illegal? But wait? they do things contradictory to what they state? That isn't following Islam or the Sharia tsk tsk. Doesn't seem so Islamic to me.

In any case their actions bare quite a startling resemblance to the USA who trod all over international rights & Human rights, while saying doing such things is immoral. I think we can both come up with a number of examples... If the USA, the Role model of the world, the champion of freedom and democracy ; ) defined human rights through their actions i don't believe any country would be able to trod over Human rights b/c there would be none.

Wahab? Could you help the ill-informed on what Wahab is?

[Rathpig]

But when these 'mercenaries' then go and kill thousands of civilians under Saudi pay roll?

And when did this happen?

Who effectively killed hundreds of thousands with its embargo on a 'Muslim' country

And when did this happen?

Remember the "UN" Embargo was an international mandate which outlined specific procedures for dealing with humanitarian support. The only finger you can point here is at the secular Baathists and the Hussein regime.

I don't recall any plans of Saddam to invade Saudi Arabia.

Likewise, Hussein didn't seek approval of his plans to invade Kuwait.

Human rights being wiped out in countries that implement sharia? Or bare the facade they do? What do you consider Human rights & how does sharia destroy them?

Sharia, as a form of religious law, is itself an affront to human rights. It mandates a secondary position for women. It forbids religious freedom. It outlines punishment for sexual orientation. It criminalizes consensual sex. And this is merely the basic forms of the concept.

A Tu Quoque fallacy is meaningless in this instance. I am a greater critic of the United States than I am of Islam, so your reference is meaningless and well as fallacious. It does not matter what the U.S. does, nor does it excuse what Saudi Arabia does under the guise of religion.

The problem with Islam is Islam. In general terms the problem is Abrahamism, but with the exception of the Zionists, few Abrahamists allow their superstitions and mythology to drive public policy. Islam is a religion which seeks to drive life itself based on superstition. Islam is a primitive and anachronistic world-view without merit.