good article. thank you.
i hope this information refute the common misconception in the west about the woman in islam. and for those who associate head scarf with oppression, i ask you to devote sometime to research it before coming to any uninformative conclusion.

I'm sorry, but an excuse for violence can be couched any old way you want to couch it. Violence by any other name is but violence.

Death and destruction in the name of "Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful" remains death and destruction.

The historical application of this religion to modern-day civilation only helps keep the followers chasing their own tails in a never-ending quest for revenge.

Rather than leave a legacy of poverty, jealousy and hopelessness, which is really at the root of the violence, our neighbors in the East might be well-served to embrace certain offerings from the West and make living a full and abundent life TODAY a part of their creed.

All peoples should strive to build and not to destroy. Each and every one of us needs to lift up and hold living fully as dear as dying poorly.

Loving our neighbor and respecting their right to exist is the highest form of honor we can pay to God.

God bless all of us.

I find this dialogue a insult to all people who have experienced the "non-aggressive, defensive" nature of Islamic "self defensive" posture of the militant sects within the Muslim culture. While the initial impetuous of the Muslim condition was created by Western arrogance and mismanagement (starting with the colonization by Europe), the current condition is solely the result of Muslim actions.

You state that: "Therefore, Jihad is confronting violence by means of violence and force by force, which makes it of a defensive nature at times and a preventive one at others. And this is what the Glorious Qur'an has maintained in the following verses. Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loves not aggressors. (02:190 ) ; Sanction is given unto those who fight because they have been wronged; and Allah is indeed Able to give them victory(22:39 ) and “If thou fears treachery from any group, throw back (their covenant) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms”(08:58)"

By your own writings, the Jihadist must "Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities.", but targeting hospitals, innocent people in market places, emergency responders, and innocent public servants in order to make a point is reprehensible in the highest order. It seems evident that the Islamist leadership is unable to create and sustain any dialogue (peaceful political settlement) in order to resolve issues. The Muslim fundamentalists are intent on violence to force their views on others at any and all costs. It is obvious that these groups have gotten the worlds attention, now it is time for the leaders to open serious dialogue and try to find solutions, which the world is ready, and WILLING, to listen to. The real question is, do Muslims want to be part of the current world order or are they intent on creating a regressive society and are they content on being looked on by everyone as suspicious and with contempt?

Another quote: "There is also the case of defending the downtrodden who are prosecuted by the arrogant and who have no means of defending themselves. Muslims have to defend these people if they ask them to. The humanitarian content of Islam makes it responsible for facing the injustice the downtrodden are subjected to by freeing them of this injustice.", then STOP KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE! The actions of the Jihadist is totally contradictory to this statement. Mullahs have the power to stop this, and stop it now! These actions just work to confirm the attitude of non-Muslims that you are an unjust, brutal people that cannot be trusted or dealt with in any way but with force. Violence cannot be allowed to condone more violence. It must stop.

I believe that this issue is not one sided, and all parties must take responsibility for past/present actions, but this post is not in response to those issues, only your comments.

I challenge you and all other so called Muslim leaders to work to force the violence to stop (call a truce) and attempt to open a dialogue with the rest of the world in an effort to help find some kind of a socio/political solution to these issues and problems.

This article is hypocritical on so many fronts it is impossible to categorize them all. I will only say that killing innocent people is never justified regardless of how you want others to interpret or how you interpret those actions. Islam uses cowardly tactics (e.g., suicide bombs) to kill innocent men, women, and children, and to defend these cowardly actions only villifies islam.

Gee, what a sweet, kind, thoughtful fellow he is! If it weren't for all that "kill-the-Jews" stuff, he'd be a real moderate! Or does the "kill-the-Jews" stuff not disqualify you from being a moderate in the WaPo these days?

Thank you, Mr. Fadlallah, for such a couraGEOUS AND clear clarification of the concept of "Jihaad", which is in full accord with the latest developments in Game Theory about the 'optimal penal code', optimal strategies, and optimal outcome for all parties in conflict situations. Not only is it in accord with the latest cutting edge scientific knowledge in the area of human behaviour, it is likely to prove to be in accord with mathematical/game theoretical proofs yet to be worked out.

I shall not offend you by saying that I am Sunni and not Shia, and even if I had enormous respect for former President Khatami of Iran, I wish that, in his Harvard Lecture a few months ago, he had been as courageously clear as you. Of course, you could have started by emphasizing that Islamic teachings state that the greatest jihaad is that which we wage against ourselves, -- our greed, our anger, our temptations and, yes, our cowardice. I am glad that you eschewed that easy, almost apologetic path, to put the discussion in the current context as well as the over-riding context of self-preservation and spell out the Quranic verses that :

Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loves not aggressors. (02:190 ) ; Sanction is given unto those who fight because they have been wronged; and Allah is indeed Able to give them victory(22:39 ) and “If thou fears treachery from any group, throw back (their covenant) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms”(08:58)

You rightly go further in emphasizing that : " There is also the case of defending the downtrodden who are prosecuted by the arrogant and who have no means of defending themselves. Muslims have to defend these people if they ask them to. The humanitarian content of Islam makes it responsible for facing the injustice the downtrodden are subjected to by freeing them of this injustice".
I said I know that I shall noyt offend you by saying that I am Sunni and not Shia, and by pointing out a shortcoming that I felt in Khatami's Harvard Lecture. By contrast, I am ready to risk your wrath by saying that I am not 100% sure if The Holy Quran is from 'divine' source, but I have tried in ways that I think must be even more skeptically than did Bertrand Russell when he wrote "Why I Am Not A Christian" to obtain unrefutable evidence of contradictions in the Quran as confronted with logic, the latest scientific discoveris in the physical and biological sciences, in mathematics or in behavioural sciences. I have not seen these contradictions except if one reads the Quran in too narrowly literal a fashion.
I end this comment by hoping that you agree with me that the Quran is not to be read in an extremely narrow, literal fashion, but must be constreud in the light of the circumstances in which the Suras were revealed, the parallels with human experience as the world evolves, the sensitivities of various societies (here I want to emphasize my reading that Ahl-al Kitaab might not be exclusively limited to Jews and Christians), and why, the open-ended interpretations that may become necessary as we colonize other planets.

Interesting that the banner at the top of the page shows the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and not the Kabaa in Mecca.

It's refreshing and applaudable that this cleric does not justify the mass murder of children and other civilians as somehow a holy act. Too bad a great and frightening percentage of the the muslim world does not agree with him, as poll after poll indicates.

If this would be 1933 you would also give a forum for the good old Adolph as well. After all, what Hitler wanted was the trains to run on time..
Just like the jihad is an "internal struggle". Excuse me while I throw up.

Useful idiots who cave in to radicals will be the first to be left without oxygen. Read a little history.

Islam is the new fascism. This man is just a minor Hitler in the making. Stop giving him a forum.

I'm stunned that the Washington Post and Newsweek are giving a respectable forum to this Jew-hating fascist.

"ZATHRAS" compares Middle Eastern clerics to Communists because both are long-winded. That entirely misses the point. What makes Fadlallah resemble a Communist spokesman is the use of propaganda to twist everything around. According to Fadlallah, jihad is purely defensive, Islam is tolerant, and Islam is more "ethically committed" than the West.

These claims are, sadly, preposterous. All over the world, Muslims have managed to convince themselves that they fight only defensive wars according to strict rules of humanity and mercy. Yet just last summer Hizballah fired rockets indiscriminantly at Israeli population centers with the intent of killing civilians. (They could have easily aimed at Israeli army positions, but chose not to.)

Islam's "tolerance" is also more than a little suspect. Anti-semitic literature reminiscent of Nazi Germany is regularly broadcast and distributed from outlets including Cairo, Damascus, and (guess who) Hizballah.

The idea that forcing women to wear burqas is somehow virtuous would be laughable were it not accompanied by polygamy (a form of slavery), Koran-sanctioned wife-beating, and wink-and-a-nod "honor" killings.

Fadlallah, we have a saying in this part of the West. It starts "You can fool some of the people some of the time..."

The way I learned history, "Jihad" involved the Muslim armed invasion and (in most cases permanent) occupation of Christian lands from the Levant to Spain. The Turkish Muslims destroyed the Eastern Christian capital of Constantinople and turned its main cathedral (Hagia Sophia) into a mosque, and were only barely kept from doing the same thing to Vienna. Before I agree to apologize for anything "the west" has done to Middle Eastern Muslims, I want an apology for all that they did to Christians first.

Also, why can't (quite a lot of) Muslim men learn enough self-control and personal chastity not to remain uncontrollable threats to rape women who aren't swathed in loose fabric from head to ankle? I would respect them for striving to perfect their own virtue and honor as opposed to telling women what to wear--but according to this Muslim leader, apparently that's too difficult to manage. It's easier to bully someone who is physically weaker, as usual. It's also primitive.

A 19th century Catholic saint, St. Anthony Claret, once spent some time in Cuba. When someone later mentioned to him that Cuban women were gorgeous, he said, only half-jokingly, that he wouldn't know because he had only ever seen their shoes. I suggest that this Muslim holy man and the others of his sort work on their own sinful natures, and leave women alone to do as they wish.

What in the world is wrong with the Washington Post? Fadlallah is the "spiritual leader" of the Hizbullah terrorist group and has been linked to the 1983 Marine barracks bombing, among other terrorist acts. He is on the Treasury Dept.'s Specially Designated Terrorist list. Someone at the Post is either astonishingly ignorant or consciously and malevolently granting a known terrorist a propaganda outlet to influence the gullible and poorly-informed. Who will be whitewashed next on "Muslims Speak Out"? I can just see it now: prominent Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden and respected Egyptian physician Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri on why infidels must convert.

Wow, I wonder what you would have printed for the nazis. Do you think publishing this propaganda is helpful? I would like to see you cover the over 9000 terrorist incidents that have taken place since 9-11-01. If you want to know the truth about islam i suggest you look at islamic countries and ask yourself are these countries about peace and tolerance.

Wasn't this guy implicated in the Beirut Marine barracks bombing?

Didn't the Reagan Administration try to kill him with a car-bomb that instead killed 80 bystanders in 1985?

"Newsweek and Washington Post hit bottom, dig."

I cannot understand why the Post would even consider publishing this unadulterated garbage. Islam is a cult like religion that condones the killing of innocents and that encourages its young to commit acts of murder in the name of god. Why aren't these hypocritical muslim leaders strapping the bombs on themselves rather than asking their youth who are largely uneducated children to becomes murderers. The answer is that they like their religion are flawed. I think the entire group are pathetic losers and their leaders condone violence because it is the easy way out of facing the truth that the Islamic faith belongs in the Dark Ages. It is the principal reason that the countries that practice Islam are backwards in most repects because the religion contaminates what would otherwise be approached on the basis of logic and rational thought.

It is this persistence in defending the henous crimes of misguided followers that detracts from what would otherwise be a tolerable set of beliefs. The US has and continues to be a country of tolerance notwithstanding outrageous behavior by its many detractors. The oxymoron in all of this is that the ranks of people waiting to get into the US is filled with muslims. I wonder why we are so popular given the vocal criticisms regularly offered up as the real reason for their violent and antisocial behavor.

Assalamu Alaikum

This is one of the best and most thoughtful and sincere comments I have heard in a long time about the issues raised by the question of Jihad and Women in Islam. I no doubt share your views, especially about clarifying the role of women. Another interesting view you espoused in the article is that Islam requires that Muslims use their intellectual abilities to contemplate and reflect upon what they are asked to believe and follow. This will no doubt also help people understand (at least from a Westerners perspective) that certain things that are blamed on Islam are nothing but cultural problems that all societies had to deal with it. They have nothing to do with Islam. If Muslims just follow the teachings of the Qur’an and Hadith, and use their Allah given intellectual capacities, then many of these problems can be overcome and resolved.

And lastly, the learned persons of the Muslim world, such as your self, have given too much ground to the deceptive intellectuals of the West (and to a lesser extent the East), to define Islamic teachings and principles and educate the rest of World wrongly about what it means to be Muslim. I hope you will do more of these sharing of your knowledge.

Jazza kumullahu Hairan (May Allah reward you with goodness

After reading this garbage I have no doubts in the 1930th you would help Nazi ideologues "to express" their opinion.

I have a question about Washington Post policy on commentaries and op-ed pieces. Today, this piece is by a supporter of the Hezbollah terrorist organization; this web specifically states this. A few weeks ago, the WP had a member of the Hamas terrorist group publish an op-end in the WP.

Hezbollah and Hamas are clearly documented as US-designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations by the US State Department. What is the editorial policy that WP is using to have supporters of FTOs published in the WP newspaper and on its website?

I add my voice to the chorus questioning the Post's idea of continually giving a forum to fascists like this one. The great stupidity of multiculturalism is that apparently we have to give equal air time to ideologies that are sick to their very core.

Indeed, reading this pro-violent screed simply amazes one at the multitude of contradictions and ill-defined terms. Neatly omitted are vast categories and concepts such as dhimmitude, where "unbelievers" aren't subjected to violence - so long as they pay an "unbeliever" tax and permit Muslims to destroy their culture and rule them as conquerors. Convenient.

The express goal of militant Islam is worldwide domination. Its adherents such as this fine gentleman trot out any excuse they can in advance of that goal. While the end remains the same, the means change constantly. What is particularly telling is how this "jihad" against "aggressors" to just "prevent them from forcing their hegemony over the land and people" - an allegedly defensive manuever, has spread Islam like a virus all throughout the Middle East and beyond, snuffing out many enlightened civilizations in the process. If you define "aggressors" as they do: any nation or culture that refuses to submit to the backwards idiocy of Islam, you start to get a sense of how far they want their jihad to truly go. Name me a disease cured by an Islamic doctor, or a technology first invented by a Muslim country (and not just stolen from subcultures conquered therein). The only scientific advancements offered by militant Islam are better car bombs, and the only "freedom" is unthinking sharia and the veil.

To those who have written harshly with regard to Fadlallah, you have not understood either Islam or Jihad.

First in Islam there is no hierarchy like in other religions. Each Imam has his own take on the Kuran and it does not necessarily have to be like the next interpretation, in fact, it can be in conflict. The Koran even, has internal conflicts that have not been resolved. Some parts say be charitable to non-Moslems, other parts say kill them and there is no reconciliation between the two different parts.

The Wahabi interpretation of Islam is not the same as Fadlallah's presentation but there is no one in the religion to say which is correct and which is incorrect, and so both versions, the violent and the non-violent versions remain out there unreconciled.

Regarding Jihad, yes, there is such a think as defensive jihad. In fact, Jihad is a war conducted when the Faith has been attacked and is considered a war in defense of the religion. In this regard, Jihad is not much different that Christians on a Crusade who fight when they feel like the Christian religion is under attack. Or the Bush Rationale for the Iraq War that we went to war because our way of life was felt to be under attack, so the Iraq War is a defensive war against the Al Qaida.

Of course the issue is when should the Islamic faith be considered to be under assault. What sort of slight imposed on a Moslem warrants the calling of Jihad? Is Jihad a proportional response to the slight? Is driving airplanes into building in New York a proportional response to some idea of an assault by the US on the Islamic Faith?

It is not the Koran, but the interpretations that are put on to it that use the religion as a rationale and as a basis for mass murder of innocent civilians. This is our problem with the Jihad idea. It is a Medeval remedy that is being worked in a Modern 21st Century world. It is out of place in civilized societies.

If only all Moslems would come to this conclusion about their Holy Book, then we could talk to them.

Lets see how Mr. Hussein Fadlallah's interpretation of Jihad would relate to the treatment of Jews.

According to him:
"the world Jewish movement has labored to expropriate from Israel its present positions of strength. Jews want to control the Muslim world's economic potential and resources, and they want to weaken it spiritually with respect to the Jerusalem question, and geographically, as regards the question of Palestine."

I guess it would be ok to kill them then.

Att: B E N HURR & Mr. F A D L A L L A et al;

Interesting Observation. Did you know that The Word "JERUSALEM" is not written in the old Quaran?? AND;

Did you also know that this Gentleman, Mr. Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, did not sight the Suras (in his #3) relating to how woman must be treated?? Example, Biblical Law, nor secular Law, on wear Burkas, headscarves, be escorted at all time by a relative companion or friend and not allowed to drive etcc.

Ben Hur; Did you know that as a Christian, Jew, Hindu, Budha, Seikh et al religions in many Islamic Country's have "LIMITED-RIGHTS" under Sharia, includes under Quasi Secular Laws too?? So all outside Islam embrasing is a "Second Class Citizen"! And Prophet Muhammad [pbuh] mentions that a Moslem is "Superior" to the Non Believers? And

In his #2 lines, Mr. Fadlallah quotes three "Suras" on Sincerity, Compelling & Apostasy. And

In His #! lines, Mr. Hussein Fadlallah quotes six "Suras" involving & Ebracing ones enemy's and calling one to peace & Reconciliation of such and not just on an individual local bases but of the WHOLE WORLD?!

P.S. ALL Pre-Apcalyptic Religion(s), Belief(s) & Faith(s) today are rendered POISON, Tautological [Never Humately Innate nor Naturaly innate] and is not Genuine Allah, Yawah, G-D, Lord, Hashem Made! All (Every & ANY preapocalyptic man made, never was "ECLAT-CREATED" as if "Biblical/Scriptured writtings) Are now become False Religions!

So; ISLAM, JUDHA, CHRISTIAN, HINDU, BUDHA , SEIKH & et al Religions, Today, and Beliefs & Faith Systems today of old are Pre-Apocalyptic and as Biblical Morality for living in the Past, not Future, is INFERIOR to the NEW-SONG (OUR-BOOK) which is SUPERIOR to all Islam, etc... religion Systems!

No!, PRE-APOCALYPTARIAN(S) [People of the Book of the Pisces-Age, not Horoscope] Good Folk Do not have to Bow Down or shine the shoes of US APOCALYPTARION(s) [Humates of the Aquarius Age, started 1968-98 for another 25,000 years of post Electric Life or Living via Secular & never Theocracy nor Monarchy] , a/k/a Eclatari-On(s) or Eclati-On(s) [Not the preapocalyptic Biblical Off(s)]

All Eclatarians ask is that the U.N. Mandate the creation of the "OUR-BOOK" a/k/a O,ne-U.niversal-R.eligion system Book" hence OURs book. This is for plain ONE EARTH & SECULAR-GOVERNMENT THINKERS. And or

Eclatarianity You can refer to this "World Faith Exchanged" created our book as a Genuine "Good Book" (containing zero Evil explitives & science defying statements & anti-Humanity Doctrines of Any kind) as the "HOUR-BOOK" a/k/a H.Oly One Universal Religion system BOOK, this is for those whom think they are truly "Holyer Than Thou"!?

Important: All PreApocalyptic religion(s or Flavours) Today are genuine "Weapons Of Mass destruction"! a/k/a WMD! So Please, Islam, Christians, Jews, Budhists, Hindus, Zoroastrians, Seikhs, Shamans, Pagans, Wiccas et al, THROW AWAY YOUR BELIEFS!

here's an ECLATi-ON Poetic Justise line, so to speaketh:

There is NO Bitterness, like Taht Of The devout, Whom Believe in a Lie, And Finally Find-out! And; Nor is there ANY strength, like That Based On Truth, Discovered through londsuffering, which begani in ones YOUTH!

"All Prejudices are acquired by the age of 18." {Similar said] By OUR Great Prophet of many [pbuh & them] Albert Einstein [jew turned Secular] , et al.

"Many Errors Of Truth, consist merely in the aplication of the wrong names of things."

- Spinoza [Jew Turned Secular]

"Ignorance is not the problem in this World, It's the things People Know? that are not So."

- Will Rogers [Secular lover]

"It is Fatal, as it is Cowardly to Blink Facts? because they are not to our Tastes."

- Tyndall [gnostic].

Vote: OUR-BOOK via the U.N. Now! Ya Ya.

P.s. OUR-BOOK & Eclatarianity is "THE RELIGION OF EVERYTHING" before "THe THEORY OF EVERYTHING"! Ya Ya.

Praise the ALLAH/LORD/GOD/ECLAT + "i". A/k/a "I" + "i" = LIFE IN PHOTONS, not Light!

Shiloha in Shiloha!

Are you talking about the 600.000 civilians - children and women included - killed in Iraq or the more of 3.000.000 civilians killed in Vietnam or the more than 500.000 civilian killed in Camboja or ...or.... by United States of America? Nothing like the the fight for freedon led by USA around the world. All those millions of inocents are free now.

TO ALL OF YOU WHO REACTED TO FADLALLAH'S PIECE WITHOUT TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, I WISH TO COMPLEMENT WHAT BEIRUTI SAID -- TRY TO UNDERSTAND.

BUT AS KHALIL GIBRAN, WHO, ALTHOUGH LEBANESE, WAS NOT A MUSLIM, WOULD SAY : FIRST, YOU MUST UNDERSTAND WHAT UNDERSTANDING MEANS.

TO UNDERSTAND WHAT UNDERSTANDING MEANS, YOU MIGHT WANT TO READ :

Roger Penrose : On Understanding Understanding, International Studies in the Philosophy Of Science, Volume 11 , April-June, 1997, pp 7-20.

IN CASE YOU HAVE DIFFICULTY ACCESSING IT
OR YOU HAVE DIFFICULTY READING IT
OR UNDERSTANDING IT

YOU MIGHT WANT TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT REALITY IS.

AND WHO WILL TEACH YOU WHAT REALITY IS?

TRY, THEN READING:

Roger Penrose : The Road To Reality – A Complete Guide To The Laws Of The Universe, Vintage Press, 2005

IT IS A CURRENT BEST-SELLER AND SHOULD NOT BE BEYOND YOUR UNDERSTANDING.

AFTER YOU HAVE READ AT LEAST ONE OF THESE TWO BOOKS OF GREAT WISDOM (I AM SURE THAT YOU HAVE ALSO READ KHALIL GIBRAN'S "THE PROPHET" -- AGAIN, KHALIL GIBRAN, THOUGH A LEBANESE, WAS NOT A MUSLIM), MAYBE WE CAN HAVE A MORE MATURE DISCUSSION ON FADLALLAH'S EQUALLY WISE OPINION PIECE.
OR YOU HAVE DIFFICULTY

Looks like the answer to #1 is justification for murdering US personnel in Iraq, as well as Iraqi police and soldiers.

Thanks for the Newsweek/WaPo multiculturalist lesson, now I know that the honor killings and genital mutilation we're starting to see of women here in the US are just part of a different culture, and we should be more tolerant!

It is clear from the expression of Mr. Fadlallah, that Islam is a political ideology. Its aim is to rule and maintain its rule against any threats. Open disagreement and apostasy is a threat. The existence of a non-Islamic state (such as Israel) is a threat.

I don’t disagree that violence is required for political ends. It’s the ends that justify war. Islam is an oppressive illiberal order that is antithetical to civilization. Violence is only justified when fighting fascist ideologies, such as Islam. Killing a jihadist Muslims, who wages war against members of civilization, is clearly justified.

We had to kill Germans and Japanese when their nations became barbaric. We’ll have to do the same when once again we are faced with a savage enemy. Civilization must do what is required to defeat any savage threat.

This guy is a nut job pure and simple. Amazing that the Washington Post(America's number terrorist ally) would post even this. Just amazing? I think even liberlas can see through this hate monger.

death to the jihadists - they are our enemies

everyone should read Orhan Palmuk's "Snow," on the head-scarf question. In the fictional book, Turkish cities are gripped in a spate of suicides by veiled girls who kill themselves because they feel persecuted for following their religion. Meanwhile, their religion rejects them because they have committed suicide, an unforgiveable sin. all the defenses of the veil that I have seen are completely hypocritical. If men are prone to sexually harrass unveiled women, then the men should have to wear chastity belts. It's not the women's fault. Veils breed shame and self-hatred. Also, I can't believe this guy defends the use of violence against violence. That's very noble. As Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye will only leave the whole world blind." Amen.

Same old, same old. Religion is the scourge of this planet, singularly responsible for the most heinous atrocities in human existence. The Jews have done it, the Christians have done, the Muslims are doing it. I vote for a tournament death cage match between all major factions. The worst case scenario is that the world follows the one winning religion. The best case scenario is they all, Jew Christian and Muslim, kill each other and leave the rest of us alone.

Dear Sir:

I congratulate you on your strong condemnation of terrorists who have brutally and indiscriminately killed others. My concern is that the Muslim world does not condemn these acts frequently enough, loudly enough, and does not take steps to actively undo the harm in these acts. What was done by Muslims for the widow of Robert F. Kennedy, the victims of the Munich Olympic massacre, the African bombings in Kenya by Al Queda, or the victims of September 11? Where are donations, monuments, speeches by your leaders, and media that condemn these violent assasinations and show them to your public as sin. Where can I go to see a monument or museum that condemns Sept. 11 in the Islamic world? What was given to the victims who are blind from shattered glass in Africa? Where are Muslim TV programs and web sites that condemn Al Queda and the Taliban who support them?

Are Jihadists given shelter, protection, aid, support, and transportation in their acts by Muslims? In many cases the answer is yes.
How can you imply that Islam is a tolerant religion when each day there are more random car bombs in Iraq, and where Buddist temples are destroyed by the Taliban, and large crowds in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Iran shout "Death to America". When do Muslims condemn this method of increasing hatred and violence that leads to delays of reconciliation and peace? In contrast, there have been no large gatherings or marches in America here where people yell death to those nations or peoples.

Nevertheless, I appreciate the tone of your letter which encourages dialog, peace, and reconciliation of all peoples.

Articles like this are a denial of reality. Islam is as peaceful as McDonald's is healthy.
Frankly, it's offensive (though I'm pretty sure I won't be calling for anyone's head any time soon).

first - brutis did not say to caesar 'try to understand."
when a rabid animal seeks to attack - do you really need a discussion with the animal as to why it wants to kill you. the animal is acting in conformity with its nature. there is no need for a discussion.
and you cannot ever believe an islamic. they can hold your hand, look deeply in your eyes, tell you that they understand and it is not what you think it is. that islam is peaceful and loving and that islam does not accept killing of the innocent.
what you have to know from the beining is that when an islamic says innocent - he does not mean non-islamics. according to islam only islamics can be innocent - they rest of us - old people, women, and even children, they can be murdered - much like they do in israel and on 911 - as they are not innocent. here it is from the mouth of islam itself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maHSOB2RFm4&mode=related&search=

and then there is the lying. to an islamic the truth is what you can get someone to believe. there are only a few things you can believe when an islamic speaks. when he telly you he can lie to you and when he tells you that you must convert or be murdered. i will provide the language about islam lying and its authorization below. no doubt i will be called a bigot for quoting the koran and speaking the truth - islamics love to use that one. you see islamics follow a cult that says everyone not islamic must convert or be murdered - but anyone who finds islamics evil for believing this - which they are required to do - well they are bigots and islamics are just following the order of their god.

to be islamics you must be vile and evil. you have no choice in the matter. islam demands hate and murder so you must hate and - if possible - murder to be islamic.

To Muslims the Koran is the very word of God, who spoke through the Angel Gabriel to Muhammad: "This book is not to be doubted," the Koran declares unequivocally at its beginning. Scholars and writers in Islamic countries who have ignored that warning have sometimes found themselves the target of death threats and violence, sending a chill through universities around the world.
The Hadith No. 284, The Muslim, volume one, says that any Jew or Christian, who heard of Muhammad but did not convert to Islam, and died in disbelief, would rot in hell! Thus Islam withdraws from all Jews and Christians the right to believe in their faiths, and practice them as such.
"The unbelievers of the People of the Book and the idolators shall be in the Fire of Hell therein dwelling for ever; those are the worst of creatures. But those who believe, and do righteous deeds, those are the best of creatures..." (XCVIII: The Clear Sign: 5)
Here those Jews and Christians, who spurn Islam, have been lumped together with the idolators such as the Hindus, and classified as 'the worst of creatures'. Therefore the Koran commands:
"O believers, take not as your friends those of them, who were given the Book before you, and the unbelievers, who take your religion in mockery and as a sport..." (V: The Table: 60)
"The true believers say: Has not God ordered a chapter that commands the holy war" (Sura 47:22); or elsewhere: "Kill the idolaters wherever you find them, imprison them, besiege them, ambush them" (Sura 9:5); and, "Make war on unbelievers" (Sura 9:29). "When you come upon unbelievers, massacre them, tighten the bands of the captives that you will have taken. Then you will set them free, or you will release them for a ransom" (Sura 8:57).
"To Allah, there are no animals viler than those who do not believe and remain unbelievers" (Sura 8:57). That is why it is necessary to Islamize them by force and by humiliation. And those who resist Islam and its founder must be chastised, according to the Koran: "Here is the fate of those who fight Allah and his messenger: you will put them to death or you will make them suffer the torture of the cross; you will cut their hands and their feet alternately. They will be driven from the country" (Sura 5:37).
"Do not display cowardice, and do not call the infidels to peace when you are superior to them" (Sura 47:22). THIS ALLOWS THEM TO MAKE PEACE SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE WAR AGAIN LATER.
4.89": They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.
"4.90": Except those who reach a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people; and if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they should have certainly fought you; therefore if they withdraw from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not given you a way against them.
"4.91": You will find others who desire that they should be safe from you and secure from their own people; as often as they are sent back to the mischief they get thrown into it headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear authority."

LYING

islam specifically tells other islamics its ok to lie - especially to non islamics.
The following quote demonstrates the broadness of situations in which the prophet permitted lying. "The sons of Adam are countable for all lies with these exceptions:
During war because war is deception,
to reconcile among two quarreling men, and
for a man to appease his wife."
The principle of Al-Takeyya - The Arabic word, "Takeyya", means "to prevent," or guard against. The principle of Al Takeyya conveys the understanding that Muslims are permitted to lie as a preventive measure against anticipated harm to one's self or fellow Muslims. This principle gives Muslims the liberty to lie under circumstances that they perceive as life threatening. They can even deny the faith, if they do not mean it in their hearts. Al-Takeyya is based on the following Quranic verse:
"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah:
except by way of precaution (prevention), that ye may Guard yourselves from them (prevent them from harming you.)
But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah." Surah 3: 28
According to this verse a Muslim can pretend to befriend infidels (in violation of the teachings of Islam) and display adherence with their unbelief to prevent them from harming him. Under the concept of Takeyya and short of killing another human being, if under the threat of force, it is legitimate for Muslims to act contrary to their faith. The following actions are acceptable:
Drink wine,
abandon prayers, and
skip fasting during Ramadan.
Renounce belief in Allah.
Kneel in homage to a deity other than Allah.
Utter insincere oaths.
The implications of the principle of Al-Takeyya
Unfortunately, when dealing with Muslims, one must keep in mind that Muslims can communicate something with apparent sincerity, when in reality they may have just the opposite agenda in their hearts. Bluntly stated, Islam permits Muslims to lie anytime that they perceive that their own well-being, or that of Islam, is threatened.
In the sphere of international politics, the question is: Can Muslim countries be trusted to keep their end of the agreements that they sign with non-Muslim nations? It is a known Islamic practice, that when Muslims are weak they can agree with most anything. Once they become strong, then they negate what they formerly vowed.
The principle of sanctioning lying for the cause of Islam bears grave implications in matters relating to the spread of the religion of Islam in the West. Muslim activists employ deceptive tactics in their attempts to polish Islam's image and make it more attractive to prospective converts.
They carefully try to avoid, obscure, and omit mentioning any of the negative Islamic texts and teachings.
An example of Islamic deception is that Muslim activists always quote the passages of the Quran from the early part of Mohammed's ministry while living in Mecca. These texts are peaceful and exemplify tolerance towards those that are not followers of Islam. All the while, they are fully aware that most of these passages were abrogated (cancelled and replaced) by passages that came after he migrated to Medina. The replacement verses reflect prejudice, intolerance, and endorse violence upon unbelievers. In conclusion, it is imperative to understand, that Muslim leaders can use this loop-hole in their religion, to absolve them from any permanent commitment. It is also important to know that what Muslim activists say to spread Islam may not always be the whole truth. When dealing with Muslims, what they say is not the issue. The real issue is, what they actually mean in their hearts."

as i have previously said - who cares what is in the heart of a man trying to kill you or your family? the last line only concerns islamics and tells them that their fake god will know they are just lying and dont really mean it.

YOU DO NOT NEED TO KNOW WHY THE DOG WANTS TO ATTACK YOU - YOU ONLY NEED KNOW THAT IS WHAT IT WANTS TO DO AND TO KILL IT FIRST.

AND I WISH TO APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE FOR ANY OFFENSE TAKEN BY DOG LOVERS FOR COMPARING THEM TO ISLAMICS.

Sir, if you yourself, and all of your Muslim brethren acted in the way you interperet the glorious Qur'an there would be no problem...

BUT YOU, AND THEY, DON'T.

The gaping holes in your explaination that belie you as a sinful, power hungry, would-be politician associating with murderous killers, entreating people to kill against God's wishes, and disobeying the glorious Qur'an are these:

Apostasy - What if the individual found a text of tha Dalai Lama and through it a new path to God unencumbered by wicked clerics pursuading young people to kill themselves? Perhaps you would say he is an apostate because he is "not of the book"? What if he found a bible and through reading its parallell truths to the Qur'an found fresh enlightenment and converted to christianity? He is still "of the book" - but you would condemn him nonetheless. In BOTH cases the individual would be living al ife of peace and harmony in keeping with the societal morals - the only thing changed is your institutional power over his decision making.

Veil - God gave us our bodies and form. How can his creation be wicked? It cannot. Only humans can be wicked. Regarding your comment about men being veiled as proof of our agreement with your position... This is a canard on your part. I wear shorts. I would be beaten in your society for wearing shorts. Many muslim women around the world do not cover - are they wicked? No they are not. They are honorable people who don't think it is appropriate (As the majority of the world would agree) to hide from their neighbors. I do not trust a person who's face I cannot see. Most of the world agrees with me- even muslims. For the veil is actually a means of Clerics to control people. I do not need controlling and neither does my Muslim sister. I can control myself and do not fall prey to sex when I see a woman at a swimming pool. But - if she shows her legs in your market she may be raped...and the man forgiven by saying "she temped me". As a man have you no self control? Do muslim men have less self control than western men? Less than asian men? Are Muslim men so weak as to be overcome by the site of a woman? As you said in your fine piece - Such individuals are weak and thus are the guilty party. You contradict yourself, Sir.

Jihad - You support people who kill innocent women and children. You support people who kill other muslims every single day. Your support for Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad are proof of your hypocrisy and failure to admit the truth of your personal quest for power. If Jihad by force is only allowed wen all other methods have failed, then you are indeed in disfavor with god allmighty. For there IS a CLEAR PATH TO PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST VIA A TWO STATE SOLUTION, THE UNITED NATIONS, THE INTERNATIONAL "QUARTET". YOU HAVE REJECTED YOUR MERCIFUL GOD'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEACE THAT HAVE BEEN HANDED TO YOU ON A PLATTER OVER, AND OVER, AND OVER AGAIN.

I can only surmise from your own statements that you are a hypocrite, a supporter of killers and murderers, and will face harsh judgement upon your end.

A dog's death is what awaits all Salafists. The US will not always have such a pacifist as president. Hezbollah's and Iran's future are radiocative, however, I hope their emergency services are up to the task.

Why is the Washington Post having this love-fest with terrorists??? This man is the HEAD of Hizbullah, a TERRORIST organization committed to the murder of an entire people. Add this to the "op-ed" propaganda piece by the Hamas rep last week, and we have the Post becoming a free billboard for those who want us (read ALL Westerners) dead.

For this guy, "agression" is defined as anyone or anything he thinks is in disagreement with him.

The lies about the status of women he tells are SO far from the reality of islamic countries, its laughable.

What a snow job these terrorists are pulling on you, Washington Post.

''This is because Islam does not want the woman and the man to be influenced by the sexual drive, in order to maintain chastity, since the woman has been treated throughout its history as being more of a sexual stimulant than the man. And this is what we notice in the art and media domains that try to present the woman as a sexual stimulant, especially to the teenagers.''.....What about Homosexuals who are attracted to other men?Should Men not cover themselves up so that they don't tempt other Gay men?

To Frank Collins,

Shalom, my buddy.

Wherever I am, there you are!

Stalking me?

Welcome! Welcome! Let's travel together for a while, maybe we can start understanding each other.

Again, welcome!

I don’t know why one wants jihadists to renounce terrorism. Terrorism is only a tactic. The problem isn’t that they don’t fight like gentlemen. The problem is that they fight for Islam. Islam is the problem.

We should consider using the same tactic. We should deliberately aim for their families. They might not mind dying in the fight for Islam but they don’t want their family hurt. When Muslims kill Jews in Israel, they don’t aim for the Israeli military but for their families. They are telling us something important; they are telling us what they’d fear most. It’s time we considering the deliberate targeting of the enemy’s families.

Then you see the moderates get off their butts and do something.

To TAMIL,

You ask : " What about Homosexuals who are attracted to other men?Should Men not cover themselves up so that they don't tempt other Gay men?"

No, they need not cover themselves up. But do they HAVE to always conduct 'gay pride marches' while poor Cindy Sheehan is arrested for protesting the killing of innocent Iraqis in an illegal war or for demonstrating for the initiation of impeachment proceedings against those whom many legal experts consider as war criminals?

Alan Turing, who gave humanity computer science, and Wittgenstein, who pioneered the UNDERSTANDING OF UNDERSTANDING (see my previous post above), were gay and were driven to suicide
not by Muslims but by purported 'children of the Enlightenment'. John Maynard Keynes, who was also gay, is vilified because he does not embrace savage capitalism but promotes the concept of a mixed economy.

Anyway, answer my first question above : Do homosexuals HAVE to always conduct 'gay pride marches' while poor Cindy Sheehan is arrested for protesting the killing of innocent Iraqis in an illegal war or for demonstrating for the initiation of impeachment proceedings against those whom many legal experts consider as war criminals?

I shall be waiting for your reply, TAMIL.

So long, and all the best!

Except that these guys have no problem sending women and children into human shield situations, or using them as homicide bombers, or just about anything else in the name of their religion.

And let's not forget that the killers of women in muslim families are usually male relatives whose 'honor' is so cheap they have to blame everything on their female relatives.....

I completely agree with Anonymous. The problem is not terrorism but the religion of Islam. The US must target the extended families of the Salafists and also employ car-bombs against them in their own cities. Damascus, Tehran, southern Beirut are all fruitful and target=rich environments to conduct a car-bomb campaign and to pay them back in their own coin.

VOTE ((((( Peace-Love-Rock-n-Roll-N-Rap, Mitt-ROMNEY, For Prez. Ya! )))))))))))))

To : C. Smith

Sir,

Thank you for understanding!

You asked for a Muslim-sponsored site that condemns terrorism.

Here goes :

http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php

There are an innumerable number of such sites.

Peace be on you, Sir! Assalaamu-'Alaikum Wa Rahmatu' Allahi Wa Barakaatuhu.

i love that part about keeping sex out of it. "Islam does not want the woman and the man to be influenced by the sexual drive, in order to maintain chastity, since the woman has been treated throughout its history as being more of a sexual stimulant than the man."
without the bs here is what it means. islamic men are such slime that they cannot be trusted not to rape a woman so the women must hide from the men. this appears to be more of a mans control problem than a womans problem, but still women are the ones who must hide.

now i like this one. apostasy.
"Apostasy is the negative position a Muslim takes towards Islam." then he goes on where he says that everyone gets to demand he tell they why he does not want to stay islamic. and if you aregue back or dont want to argue - this is what that means - "Thus, such a position will be similar to grand treason to the motherland."

YOU HAVE TO LOVE THE INTERNET - THIS HITS JUST KEEP ON COMING. THIS GUY IS SERIOUS AND BELIEVES THIS CRAP.

this is like the communist used to do. they put anyone against communism into a nut house because only crazy people would reject communism.

you notice the "dialog" crap about jews and christians. its the same as with apostasy. if after the dialog you dont want to convert they get to kill you.

"This suggests that the Muslims should befriend the world by cooperating in solving the problems without conceding their spiritual and intellectual authenticity." this is islam double speak for - we still get to kill you becasue the koran tells us to.
or demanding the death of the pope for quoting an empiror who said that forced religion was evil - as if it isn't evil.

and here is some of the full equality of women in islam. any of you ladies want to live like this?

Khomeini's Teachings on sex with infants and animals
Islamic Teachings on sex with infants:

"A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. If he penetrates and the child is harmed then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however would not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister."

The complete Persian text of this saying can be found in "Ayatollah Khomeini in Tahrirolvasyleh, Fourth Edition, Darol Elm, Qom"

Islamic Teachings on sex with animals:

"The meat of horses, mules, or donkeys is not recommended. It is strictly forbidden if the animal was sodomized while alive by a man. In that case, the animal must be taken outside the city and sold."

I wonder if it is OK to sodomize a dead animal? What happens if the buyer brings the poor animal back into the city?

"If one commits an act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrements become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed as quickly as possible and burned, and the price of it paid to its owner by him who sodomized it."

The poor animal first is sodomized and then killed and burned. What an Islamic justice towards animals? Where are the animal
rights group?

"It is forbidden to consume the excrement of animals or their nasal secretions. But if such are mixed in minute proportions into other foods their consumption is not forbidden."

"If a man fornicates with an animal and ejaculates, ablution is necessary."

It does not say who should have ablution: the animal or the man?

or children - what dialog do islamics teach their children about those not islamic - here is mickey mouse teaching the children.

even mickey mouse has a place in islam:
first little mickey says to murder jews:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZEGsnWZKh8

and when that is not enough - they have a program with a pretend jew murdering him so that little children think it really hapened and the hate of islam is with them forever.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=iDMta_VBdLQ

dont islamics get tired of lying? probably not, they have been doing it for 1400 years and will continue to do it as long as they infect this earth.

And I agree with "Love and Rockets"! That's getting serious.

Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah informs us that:
"if [the apostate] does not agree to re-embrace Islam...it would suggest that his position is one of a complicated stubbornness, and not of someone with an open minded intellectual mentality... such a position will be similar to grand treason to the motherland."

This reminds me of similar types of reasoning expressed during the Catholic Inquistion and the Protestant witch burnings. We all know what measures were used to enforce the faith during these periods.

Ummm! No, I don't think I want any.

Support ALL Sunni's who kill or bring to Justice any Anti-Humanity Al Quada terrorist type peaple! And Al JAZEERA, via English version too, should show or write more , like every day, how islam Authorities (religious & or Secular) are diciplining, capturing counter attacking etc.. ALL Anti Humanity Muhammidians and Quaranaholics that is killing the Islam name under selfish means and under Psychotic influence.

It's true, Like Medicine, too much freedom for one person is anothers Mans/WomanPoison . Ya Ya. SO;

"OH ISLAM of ABRAHIM, Hear ye hear ye; Hark unto the Lord your Allahs Words; "Bring to International court of Justice ALL Every & Any Anti Quaranic Transgressors.... And put to death all their Family & friends whom support them"

The Lord G-D Almighty Eclat Allah is "SOURCE-ONE" OUR New-SONG comming from OUR Old Songs" Behold these as Muhammad's [pbuh] new Fatwah!

In Shallah & Hom Do La. ALLAH KARIM! SHOLOM!