All Comments (219)

Buy cheap lopressor , discount generic lopressor

Yhanks you45a50b381547c89c9696ede4dea3e0b7

Hello peopleaf60ca7c97cad3689ed9a4c75f507ce0

Yhanks you3cd8e4f1c3950ae5aa385b0e80f1cf99

Seeker of Truth wrote:
Evidently Prophet Mohammad had adopted the Jewish law in this case - punishment by death for fornication and adultery. Since he had no power to forgive sins, he was merely acting like a just judge meting out the punishment prescribed by law.

Mo only used the shariah law based on the quran.

A prophet with a "anytime" access to someone he believed was God should have been a role model for humanity. If as muslims claim "Allah forgives all sins except shirk" then why could'nt Mo forgive this woman.

I have never received a muslim explanation for this one.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum

Ross:

On several ocassions you wanted to know why Prophet Mohammad did not forgive the women who were guilty of fornication and adultery even after they had repented of their sin.

Obviously it seems to be an issue that concerns you very much. Since no explanation was given by any Muslim, here my non-Muslim one.

Evidently Prophet Mohammad had adopted the Jewish law in this case - punishment by death for fornication and adultery. Since he had no power to forgive sins, he was merely acting like a just judge meting out the punishment prescribed by law.

Regarding your concern about a mother with a new born child being put to death for fornication: It should be of some consolation for you to know that new born infants form a bond with their biological mother only with time. Infants and little children seem to find it easy to form bonds with anyone with whom they relate to, whether biologically related or not. So there was no way the new born child of the woman who was put to death as punishment would have missed its biological mother. One must assume that Prophet Mohammad found a loving married woman to take care of the new born infant within a secure family situation.

Having said that, I do not approve of death as penalty for fornication or adultery, even if such an extreme measure was probably chosen to maintain social order, stability of families and to offer the most stable and healthy environment for children to be brought up in.

I hope Muslims will give you a more complete explanation for Prophet Mohammad's behaviour. Maybe their speculation would give a clearer picture of the social situation of the time in which Prophet Mohammad lived.

I hope that helps.

Please note: When I referred to Western/ised Muslims in my earlier post, I did not mean it in a derogatory sense. I only meant to emphasise the cultural difference of Muslims stemming from the East/Middle East. Ms Taylor and Victoria are both white American Muslims, late converts to the religion. It means that they were born and raised in the white American culture, strongly influenced by a non-Muslim culture. Their personal experience before converting to Islam has been with other religions or atheism. Jihadist is half Western in origin although she lives in Asia. The point I was trying to make was - they do not for those reasons represent the average Muslim, most of whom live in the East/Middle East. Not all Muslims of the East/Middle East, who live in the West are westerised (I am not referring to the values of Christianity here) in their culture and values.

Victoria:

You say your Turkish Muslim husband would be comfortable and proud about the way you present yourself on this forum. About absolutely everything? You say so. It would have been good to have some objective feedback though, hence my questions were addressed to others. You continue to remain silent to questions addressed to you.

Terminator:

The diatribe goes as long as interested parties want it to. Freedom of speech cuts both ways. Muslims are allowed freedom of expression of course. Non-Muslims are allowed to express criticism. That is the whole point of this forum, in case you haven't noticed. OK that's enough with you deciding when something is enough!

OK that's enough! Does this diatribe go on ad infinitum? The original question was about the Latin mass, remember? So what does all this Islamic ranting have to do with that? WE DO HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH in this country so it's alright for muslums to express themselves. Of course, we couldn't do that in an Islamic dominated country without being brought to court, killed or harmed. Freedom of expression or religion is not allowed in those lands. By the way I thought Frank's comment about huggs and kisses was funny. When I first read it I laughed out loud. But I did regain my composure after reading some of the other sobering responses.

Victoria:

You have not answered the questions directed at you either (20 July 2007 at 2:09 AM).

What I observed about posts by Ms Taylor, Victoria, and Jihadist:

Sisterhood is expressed among Muslim women.

Muslim men are treated with respect and as brothers in faith.

Non-Muslim women are rarely responded to, almost never if they are critical of Islam.

Non-Muslim men are always responded to, seemingly with a great desire to please, no matter how critical of Islam they are.

Sexual morality in Islam was a topic that cropped up over and over again. There should definitely have been a more efficient way to bring the discussion to a meaningful closure. Nobody goes on and on about the life of Prophets and sexual practices mentioned in the Jewish Scripture. What people need to know about is the current sexual morals as recommended/commanded by Islam and how progressive Muslims practice their faith in that regard.

I would imagine that no Asian/Middle Eastern Muslim woman (if not completely Westernised) would discuss so many personal details online on a serious international forum such as this.

Views other than mine would make very interesting reading.

well- since your incommunicado- go on to the boards on muslims speaking out

seeker of truth-

those are interesting and deep questions, ones ive thought about alot in my life, from different perspectives (besides muslim i mean)

personally, my husband is comfortable and proud with how i present myself in this forum.

since no one has bothered to answer or remark on your questions about us ladies, it seems you yourself have an opinion about the questions you raised.

its late right now and i just peeked in before going to sleep after a long day-

i dont work tomorrow, so if i can, ill try to give a decent answer.

possibly you could share your own critique of our styles and manners of communication, since you seem to be the only one paying any attention.

peace

Ms Pamela Taylor, Jihadist, Victoria et al:

What does Islam say about sexual morality?

What does a progressive Muslim woman say about sexual morality in a sexually permissive age?

Is fornication and adultery still a sin, even if not punished with death?

Attention researchers, Muslim and non-Muslim:

Ms Pamela Taylor, Jihadist and Victoria have on The Post On Faith forum functioned as ambassadors for the Muslim faith.

Read through all the posts since the beginning of the discussions in November 2006 and try to answer the following questions:

How convincing is their testimony as married Muslim women representing their faith - to Muslims, to non-Muslims?

How do they respond and relate to Muslims and non-Muslims on this thread?

Do they respond more often to Muslims or non-Muslims, males or females?

Their hijabs declare chastity and modesty externally. Is it reflected in their communication with males?

Would you have negative comments about their style of communication if they were your mother/wife (all of them are married and have children)/sister/daughter?

They have disclosed a lot of personal details. Would you be comfortable about such disclosure if they were your mother/wife/sister/daughter?

What could be considered appropriate disclosure of personal details in a faith forum such as this?

oss is Frank Collins wrote:
Your painting of the whole faith with the same brush is hateful. You blame all of the faithful for the actions of an overall small percentage.

I blame the FAITH (not the faithful) for the actions of an overall small percentage.

Ross is Frank Collins wrote:
Even God said of Sodom, "And he said: I will not destroy it for the sake of ten" (righteous men).
Do you actually purport to know that there are not at least TEN righteous Muslims in the world (or an equivalent to ten in comparison of the two populations)? Would you maintain an attitude less charitable than God, even if what you allege IS true?

I will not want ANYONE destroyed even if there are NO righteous muslims in the world. My aim is to awaken muslims to this evil called islam not wish death or evil upon them (islam is already doing that).

Frank,

Don't YOU tell me what MY faith is! There is absolutely nothing Chirstian about your posts. NOTHING!

If your concern is that "Islam is inherently evil", what are you doing to HELP the situation?

That's right, NOTHING!

I, for one, intend to continue to learn as much as I can, and never presume that I know enough about anything...even after I have finished my formal education.

That being said, I have already learned enough to know that you are just discouraging any valuable conversation on the subject. You've made up your mind in an ignorant fashion, and are far too stubborn about that to actually LEARN anything new. Your posts serve only as an attempt to convince yourself that you have any kind of validity. Unfortunately, you say far more about YOURSELF than you do of Islam, and any sane person sees right through your hateful rhetoric, and irresponsible hack scholarship.

I will continue to pray for you.

Where does it say that they are Christian, Frank?

catholic:
you are islamic not catholic. and at least write the entire quote.
i wrote it that way becasue a lot of butt holes think its ok to kill gays, BECAUSE THEY ARE GAY. religion hardly ever plays a part for these animals, they just want to kill.
but is does play a part for islamics because THEY MAKE IT A PART!
the koran commands murder and hate, the new testament does not.
to murder and hate all an islamic need do it follow the koran.
for a christian to murder and hate they muct VIOLATE the teaching of jesus.
that is the difference.

As per Anon early in the discussion:

"The hurdle towards the reformation of Islam is to recognise the fact that Islam is not a religion but a cult. Cults are exponentially more difficult to reform than religions."

One definition of a cult:

A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader e.g. 1 )Muslims and their Mohammed, and the clerics, ayatollahs, imams and "angel freaks" who follow/ed the illiterate, warmongering, hallucinating Arab's koranic ways 2) "Jesus Freaks" like Bob Jones' followers 3) "Latin Mass /Catholic only/"angel loving" Filiciders brainwashed by the likes of B16 and the previous all white male, "celibate, "aarpie", European "charismatics" called popes.

Frank says:

"religion hardly ever plays a part for these animals"

But according to EVERYTHING you ever rant about, Frank, religion plays the WHOLE part for Muslims. The attackers were not identified by faith, and possibly had none at all. But what difference does it make, really? You've finally said something I can come close to agreeing with (the quote above), but you contradict EVERYTHING you hatefully waste so much space on these threads with.

bashir is just another islamic terrorists who does not appear to know that moho the child rapist was in the 7th century and not the 14th.

Bashir has a very well-written piece on PostGlobal... I recommend it to people on this thread arguing about fanaticism in Islam.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/bashir_goth/2007/07/men_die_for_other_men_not_for.html

CATHOLIC:
i wrote it that way becasue a lot of butt holes think its ok to kill gays, BECAUSE THEY ARE GAY. religion hardly ever plays a part for these animals, they just want to kill. and when we catch them we prosecute them and i hope they execute this animal.
i never said it was becasue of the victim being homophobic and if you were not so obtuse you would have seen that, but you are just so upset at me that you want to make up something to complain about.
and anno:
the book was the old and new testament - and the new testament has no restrictions on food and if the fake prophet was really talking to god, his god would have known it too.

and who said i condoned this action, i condemned it. its islam i condem.

Frank,

Only you, the klan and the skin heads condone such hate killing or try to defend it. You are in a good company...

Oops, make that "empathize with your situation". My "pretty wingie talking guardian thingie"'s spell checker is not working today.

Ahh, Catholic School Student,

Still having problems with Latin and its "angelic" callings??

As one also bred, born and brainwashed in the Catholic/Latin Church, I can emphatize with your situation. I would pray for your acceptance of reality but an omniscient God needs no prayrers since the Singulariy knows all before it happens and therefore should be correcting all ills since He/She is also all-merciful. I wonder why babies are still born then with defects??

Maybe Father Edward Schillebeeckx, the famous contemporary Catholic theologian, has a better answer?

Church: The Human Story of God,
Crossroad, 1993, p.91 (softcover)

"Christians (et al) must give up a perverse, unhealthy and inhuman doctrine of predestination without in so doing making God the great scapegoat of history."

"Nothing is determined in advance: in
nature there is chance and determinism; in the world of human activity there is possibility of free choices. Therefore the historical future is not known even to God, otherwise we and our history would be merely a puppet show in which God holds the strings. For God, too, history is an adventure, an open history for and of men and women."

i.e. No one, not even God can prophesy since that would violate the God-given gifts of Free Will and Future.

What Was God's Original Commandment about eating the meat of the swine?

In Leviticus God said:
“There are some that only chew the cud or only have a split hoof, but you must not eat them. The camel, though it chews the cud, does not have a split hoof; it is ceremonially unclean for you. 5 The coney, [a] though it chews the cud, does not have a split hoof; it is unclean for you. 6 The rabbit, though it chews the cud, does not have a split hoof; it is unclean for you. 7 And the pig, though it has a split hoof completely divided, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. 8 You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you.”

Jesus came as a messenger to the Israelites only and his testimony is clear:

A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession." Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us."
He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel." The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said. He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs." "Yes, Lord," she said, "but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' table." Then Jesus answered, "Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted." And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

And Jesus was born a Jew, lived like a good Jew and died a Jew and his confirmation that the Law stands is obvious from his words in the book of Mathew:

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. “

So there you have it. We have a commandment from God not to eat pork and Jesus confirmed and conformed to the Law. So if some Christians decide to eat Pork, that’s their problem. They’ll have to answer to their maker for it.

"homophobic words? maybe they did not like that."

There's a fine example, Frank. I'm sure HE did NOT like it, but he's dead now.

Why do you write it that way? Are you under the impression that this poor man's attack was the result of HIS homophobic words? That's not at all what that post says. Quite the opposite.

If I understand YOU, then you have poor reading comprehension (in addition to poor writing skills), which makes your allegations of facts dubious.

If I don't understand you correctly, it's because you write like an ignorant mad man.

anno:
re Mr. Satendar Singh
how do we know it was because of his being islamic? homophobic words? maybe they did not like that.
and who is going to go after these criminals, those very people who islam give you permission, no commands you to, hate, murder, kidnap, torture, sell into slavery, rape, cut off body parts, etc..
it would be nice if islamics would actually go after islamics who commit acts of violence against infidels, BUT THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Frank Collins,

Aren't you some kind of professor, or something? Go back and read what I said. I never said being incorrect was bearing false witness. Concerned does not express his summations of world religions as opinions either.

I wouldn't bother to waste my time checking YOUR alleged "facts" since critical thinking alone leads me to hypoethesize that you have no credibility. It would be an exercise in futility.

You think formality doesn't matter, well guess again. Manner of dress is no indication of ability, but you won't get most jobs dressed in cut-offs and flip flops. Besides, writing in a manner that, at least, IMPLIES that you have an education does not require the effort you claim...if you actually have an education.

Sorry Frank, Sir, This is the extent of the time I have for you. I will keep you in my prayers though, and ESPECIALLY your poor family. I pity them having to suffer the embarassment of you.

if the koran says:
""5.5": This day (all) the good things are allowed to you; and the food of those who have been given the Book is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them; and the chaste from among the believing women and the chaste from among those who have been given the Book before you (are lawful for you); when you have given them their dowries, taking (them) in marriage, not fornicating nor taking them for paramours in secret; and whoever denies faith, his work indeed is of no account, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers."
why cant you eat pork, or have alcohol, they are not denied the people of the book, when he was also including chritians?
the fact is his education about religion sucked and he had no idea what he was talking about when he put his words into his alleged god's mouth.

CATHOLIC STUDENT:
being wrong is not a lie, and is not false witness. a statement of opinion is not a lie, its just a different opinion.
here is a fact about martin luther. do you know why the german princes all got behind him so fast? MONEY!
you see the catholic church did not allow money lending, so as trade expanded so did that business, as well as banking, which charged interest for certain acts.
luther told the princes he did not care about that and all of a sudden they were right behind him and his new religion. that gave rise to the great german and holland banking houses, as well as others.

Washington, DC - July 17, 2007 - The Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF) and the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) are saddened about the death last week of Mr. Satendar Singh, a 26 year-old Sikh American victim of a vicious hate crime, as he was removed from life-support at a local hospital.

On Sunday July 1, 2007, Mr. Singh was beaten unconscious while enjoying a picnic with some friends at Lake Natoma in Folsom, CA. His attackers reportedly yelled xenophobic and homophobic remarks to him and his friends. After being taken to the hospital, Mr. Singh clang to life for four days before family members agreed to remove him from life-support after seeing he was registering little to no brain activity.

SALDEF and CAIR are concerned with this senseless murder of a promising young man. Hate crimes are designed to create fear amongst particular communities. Mr. Singh was targeted due to the color of skin, his national origin, and because he was the only one in his group without a female friend present. This attack was intended to create fear in the Fijian, South Asian, Arab, Muslim, Sikh and LGBT communities.

"We, SALDEF strongly condemn this act of violence. Such hate has no place in this country," said SALDEF Volunteer Attorney Neilinder Ranu. "Sadder still, Mr. Singh had lived peacefully in the US since he was 19, only to have his life ended around the Fourth of July, when we celebrate the freedoms and principles of inclusion that this country were founded upon."

Mr. Singh passed away in the intensive care unit at Mercy San Juan Medical Center thousands of miles away from his parents who live in Fiji. He lived with his aunt, uncle, and grandmother in Sacramento.

"The Sacramento Valley community has made a pledge in Mr. Singh's memory to fight against hate, said CAIR-Sacramento Valley Executive Director Basim Elkarra. This tragedy shows highlights the importance of the community coming together to fight against hate."

Together SALDEF and CAIR stand in solidarity against all acts of hate. We hope the community and all of America will not tolerate such acts of violence. We hope that the residents of Sacramento will put aside any differences and realize a stronger sense of community after this tragedy.

As of this release, no one has been arrested for this crime.

there is only one frank collins but i do sometimes use only my first name.
i never post songs. and im not concerned christian either.
i like my name. its been my name for a very long time. i am proud of is and i use it.
the hadith are a record of what moho said and did that is not part of the koran. as such is is not the aleged inspired word of the islamic god, it is what moho the child rapist did to comply with that word.
like telling his people it is ok to lie, or murdering women as the breast fed their child, or having sex with a 9 year old child - which is always rape.
and i know im called a bigot because i paint all islamics as terrorists, but i do that becasue they are. i am told that i am wrong in judging all islamics by the acts of a few. but isn't that what islam does and has been doing for 1400 years. the koran demands that jews, christians, hindu's, anyone not islamic, they are hated, kidnaped, held for ransom, have body parts cut off, tortured, sold into slavery, raped, murdered if you will not become islamic or murdered if you leave islam. isn't that bigoted?
and the koran is written as the events happened, not by topic. so those few areas where islamics are fond of quoting about peace, well they are abrogated by subsequent verses demanding those vile acts to be performed on infidels.
if you have a neighbor and he tells you he wants to live in peace, ok, you believe him. then he tells you that he is the chosen son of your religion and you have to accept him and his new religion. well you decide not to deal with him. then he and others come to your house and attack it, killing some or your family and some friends that were there too. now you [and your family] do not surrender to him and he keeps attacking you, day after day, year after year, and his followers century after century attacking surviving members of your family. they kidnap you, hold you for ransom, cut off body parts, sell you into slavery, torture you, take your property and lands, and hunt you down where ever you are, all with the stated purpose of complying with the commands of a god that demands his conduct towards you.
do you conisder his first words of peace as controling or his and his followers subsequent conduct in hate and murder.
once islam got an army - islam no longer wanted peace they wanted PIECE. a piece of this, a piece of that, until they have it all.
and there is no dispute about parts of islam,
ALL ISLAMICS MUST BELIEVE THE KORAN IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF THEIR ALLEGED GOD AND GODS' COMMANDS MUCT BE COMPLIED WITH.

Thanks for your response Pam...certainly hope we are able to curb fanaticism based on religion and make the world a better place to live

Concerned The Christian Now Liberated,

Guardian Angels don't give orders, hence the title "Guardian". If they did, the orders would not come before those of God. God did not order anything to be spoken in Latin, and neither did the Pope. He merely provided the option.

It's sad to see you turn your back on God by denying yourself REAL knowledge, trading it for humor and cleverness, then failing miserably at that too.

I may be Catholic, but I also know that your "characterization" of Martin Luther is just plain wrong! That is the bearing of false witness against thy neighbor.

Lord God, please allow into your light and presence blaspheming hack scholars who spread dis-information in order to shake the faithful of all faiths. Amen.

Blessed Mother, please join me in my prayer. Amen.

Catholic School Student,

Your "pretty wingie talking guardian thingie" is not happy. He/she expects all comments to be presented in Latin. Such lack of respect for the language of our Roman slave lords will put you in limbo for eternity.

Ross is Frank Collins wrtoe:
You're practically a narcotic!

Again, does'nt matter what I am, my aim is open the muslim eyes to this evil called islam. A cult that is beheading, lashing or stoning people as we speak.... but you can continue napping.

I'm against hate not faith.

"I'm against hate not faith."

Your painting of the whole faith with the same brush is hateful. You blame all of the faithful for the actions of an overall small percentage.

Even God said of Sodom, "And he said: I will not destroy it for the sake of ten" (righteous men).

Do you actually purport to know that there are not at least TEN righteous Muslims in the world (or an equivalent to ten in comparison of the two populations)? Would you maintain an attitude less charitable than God, even if what you allege IS true?

Pamela,

The problem is not going to be solved by taking polls ( a reference to your statistics?). The problems as with all religions are the foundations of said religions.

Once again, with respect to Islam:

Mohammed, an illiterate, hallucinating Arab, also had embellishing/hallucinating scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the Koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers. The agenda continues as witnessed by the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers , the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani koranics, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases and the Filipino koranics i.e. a summary of the War on Terror-the Muslim "who are the bad guys" Problem.

Pamela,

Repeat 10 times, "There are/never were any angels". This will put you on the path to the reality of Islam.

Ross,

You say 'my aim is open the muslim eyes' I think your objective is to insult. As far I am concerned you can go to hell you redneck

Gandalf --

It is hard to assess the percentages of Muslims who believe in particular ways. For instance, on the recent Pew survey which has been discussed on this thread, one of the questions asked if the respondent believes the Qur'an is literally the word of God. A yes answer would seem to align the respondent with fundamentalist Christian views about the Bible. But the fact of the matter is that the Qur'an and the Bible are very different sorts of books, and to say that you believe the Qur'an is the actual word of God means something quite different than saying that you believe the Bible is the Word of God, so that perceived alignment would not necessarily exist in reality. This kind of false assumption of meaning can cloud the results of surveys.

So too when people are asked about controversial topics, different understandings of the question can cloud the meaning of the response. Say suicidal operations. Let us leave aside the case of the person who straps a bomb on their body and blows it up in the market place, and move to the case where a soldier or a platoon storm a beach knowing that hundreds of them are going to die. Their commander is willing to sacrifice those men, and perhaps even to risk the entire platoon being wiped out, for the advantage of holding the beach. The mission could be described as suicidal, especially if the odds of success aren't very good, yet we are not likely to call that a suicidal mission, and the commander is likely to be hailed as a hero if it succeeds, and perhaps commemorated post mortem as a brave soul if it fails. Is there a qualitative difference between the two, of course. But there are also some similarities that muddy the waters for many Muslims answering polls like the Pew survey. And, I would think, posing the above two scenarios to non-Muslims would also make them pause to think about how we define tactics that are ok, or not ok, and so on, what is suicidal and what is not. If you define the beach storming operation as suicidal, then the question takes on whole new parameters. The reason I raise this issue is because I have heard Muslims struggling with them here in the US -- they are clear that strapping a bomb on one's chest and blowing up a restaurant is horrific and unacceptable, but what about the beach storming -- that may be just as desperate an act, but it may be justified. More than that, they have struggled with where to draw the line. Again, I can't think of one person I've talked to who did not say civilians were off limits, particularly women and children, but there are grey areas around combatants and what may or may not consist of a suicidal mission, what may or may not be an acceptable tactic, whether the man has to be an active combatant or a soldier or if it is ok to attack potential combatants, and so on.

Either way, the number of Muslims who condone the archetypal terrorist attack, blowing up trains or buildings or markets is a very small percentage. The problem is when you are dealing with 5 billion + people, even 1 percent is a horribly huge number. :(

As for combatting -- there are several things we can do. 1) Muslims must challenge other Muslims on a one on one basis. At the same time, we need to have a wide ranging, frank, and hard hitting conversation within the greater community and with our traditional jurisprudence. 2) Developed nations must take action to alleviate the economic inequalities of the world, at to acknowledge that their economic prosperity came largely on the backs of free labor imported from Africa, and the exploitation of natural resources that enriched their countries, but did not enrich the countries where those resources were located. We can discuss till the cows come home as to how that played out and whether those resources would have gone undeveloped without Western industrial power, etc, etc, but the fact remains that there is a perception of injustice that is coloring relations between those who align themselves with the developing world and those who live in developed countries. With the various attacks since 2001 it is very clear that actually living in deprived conditions is not the key to the terrorist mentality, but identification with the injustices those countries have suffered through (from colonialism to natural resource exploitation to drug company profiteering and the huge economic imbalance of the world)(often through some personal contact or experience but not always) is essential. 3) political injustices/oppression must be ended. This one is more problematical because it's clear from any number of American military adventures that military solutions to political problems are not very effective.

Z Z Z Z Z Z *snort* ...oh, did you say something Ross?

Consider this Ross/Frank,

Native American Proverb: When you find you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount and find a new one.

Back to my nap. You're practically a narcotic!

I think the one who is dogmatic and arrogant is the one that claims Christianity is the only true religion and there is only one path to God. Their proof is the quote attributed to Jesus, which can not be found anywhere else in the bible that says "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” That is intolerance and I dare any Christian to say otherwise.

Ross is Frank Collins wrtoe:
You're practically a narcotic!

Again, does'nt matter what I am, my aim is open the muslim eyes to this evil called islam. A cult that is beheading, lashing or stoning people as we speak.... but you can continue napping.

I'm against hate not faith.

Re: ROSS is FRANK COLLINS

Even if I am Frank, Mo still remains a child molestor and islam still remains a wicked faith.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Muslim "song"

Islam's Not for Me

They try to tell me my religion is wrong
They try to tell me to follow Islam
They said their prophet was a righteous dude
But I found out none of their words were true
I read the Quran and I read the Hadith
And the sickness of Muhammad was apparent to me
He justified perversion in the name of Allah
When he married a girl too young for a bra
She was playing with dolls when the prophet came
Her childhood was stolen in Allah’s name
Aisha was nine when he took her to bed
Don’t tell me that fool’s not sick in the head
Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.
Aint gonna follow no child molester

Islam's not for me.
Islam's not for me.

The sickness of the Islamic mind
Has caused the Mullahs to be blind
To justify their prophet they would justify sin
So the sins of the prophet are repeated again
All over the world in Islamic states
9 year old girls suffer cruel fate
Sold into marriage to twisted men
And Aisha’s sad story is repeated again
Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.
Aint gonna follow no child molester,

Islam's not for me.
Islam's not for me.

Do you care about women all over the world?
Do you care about those little girls?
Then stand up and fight for human rights
Speak out against the laws of Islam
Ain’t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, prophet pretender.
Aint gonna follow no child molester,

Islam's not for me.
Islam's not for me.
Islam's not for me.

Listen to it here:
http://www.jasoncoleman.com/BlogArchives/2005/11/in_case_you_wer_1.html

Concerned is not a myth, just a pretty wingie thingie...oh, never mind.

Take the first step and repeat ten times; "Concerned The Christian Now Liberated is a myth"!

Gators vs. Concerned The Christian Now Liberated

Gators are definitely not poets, but Concerned The Christian Now Liberated doesn't have the shame not to prove it.

I can see by the time of your posts that you really need an occupation. It would suit you much better than your ridiculous PREoccupation.

Poor Victoria, she still cannot see the myths in the foundations of her religion.

Victoria, read carefully, Gabriel did/does not exist. Mo was an illiterate, warmongering Arab who saw signficant profit in being a prophet aka fortune teller. You and your fellow Muslims must come to grips with these facts. Yes, indeed, you too can be part of the War against Terror by correcting the foundations of Islam and its current book of death aka the koran.

Take the first step and repeat ten times, angels are myths!!!!!!!!!

what the frenchy french are you on about now concerned?

are you that obsessed with what i think?

GANDALF- answer tomorrow

Muslim "poetry":

Seven Muslim, arsonists doctors in the UK,

the 9/11 terrorists,

the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers ,

the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers ,

the Bali crazies,

the Kenya crazies,

the Pakistani koranics,

the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers,

the Lebanese nutcases

and the Filipino koranics

i.e. a "poetic" summary of the War on Terror-the Muslim "who are the bad guys" Problem.

But Victoria continues with her Islamic "yackity yack" believing in angels and warmongering Arabs.

there is no interpretation necessary of this.
we all know what it means.
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."

Anonymous @ 3:18 pm

I know this is a difficult question for you to answer, but do you think most muslims think the way you do or do they interpret quran in a way similar to that idiot fanatic Naik does?