"Make me an angel that flies from Montgomery. Make me a poster of an old rodeo. Just give me one thing that I can hold on to. To believe in this living is just a hard way to go."

Watch your STAR TREK folks! Resistance is Futile! You will be assimilated! Drink Coke!

Warriors abound in History. Sometimes in the name of religion - but always with the higher value of warfare.
Ohg.
http://thefiresidepost.com/2007/11/27/life-or-death-warrior-virtues/

am girl I like see one goht in the city.

So very well said Mr. Goth, thank you for a breath of fresh air.

Well....whew! I have read each post attached to Mr. Goth's article and have come away with one conclusion...God kills...praise God! Fighting over who gets to do it and get away with it seems stupid and a waste of time. I thought religion was created to thwart the injustice of man over man, but it seems as just another way to exercise power over man and receive a pass for killing those who get in your way. All of God's writings were written by a man for others, and all of God's sayings were spoken by a man to others. No one has yet to prove that God has actually spoken. Myth and legend are not proof.

However, the one thing all religions have in common is their deep mistrust of the actions of man...especially he who disagrees with you. Amen.

You are right, Mr. Goth.

It was a man named Muhammad who was responsible for the murder of Asma bint Marwan. She was a poetess who critized the prophet of Islam. She was murdered on Muhamamd's orders, not God's.

Same goes for the murder of the 800 male Jews of the Banu Qurayza tribe. Muhammad was responsible for their murder, not God. the heads of 800 innocent men, some as young as 12 years old, were chopped off, their wives and children sold into slavery and the their property and land stolen by a man named Muhammad, the prophet of the Arabic god Allah, but not God's prophet.

giberish to block facts and cover up relevant posts.

It's shocking to see so much ignorance attached to an article with so much intelligence.

"The question I am unable to answer is why does profound religious belief foster intense and murdurous (sic) intolerance?"

This is a scientific question, and I would recommend you this following link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2003/

What I remember from the lecturer Vilayanur S. Ramachandran, is that certain structures of the brain that has relation to schizofrenia and religious feelings, can takes over logical reasoning or even fear.

The USA goes to war in Iraq based on interests' calculation, based on logical reasoning processes, but they can't calculate the moves of people who are fighting not based on interests.

It's like love is more valuable than money. If you know what I mean.

I deeply regret my usual slander of and hatered for Islam and Muslims-especially my cut and past abuse. Am really ashamed of myself and solmenly swear that from now on my loyalty will be to the great USA and not to AIPAC and israel.

"The question I am unable to answer is why does profound religious belief foster intense and murdurous (sic) intolerance?"

The closest I can get to an answer is that fundamentalists of all persuasions are taught that The Good is following the letter of the law, and that our letter is right, and their letter is wrong. Given this backdrop, an 'us versus them' scenario is established, and we find ourselves quickly embroiled in a war to end all wars--always "Our Good" versus "Their Evil."

We would do well to heed the Nazarene's words that "He who is without sin (should) cast the first stone." And we would also do well to follow Jesus' teaching that the heart and spirit of the law is love, and that the letter without the spirit is what creates the pharisaic hypocrite, and makes him/her a blind guide and fool.

I think religion is getting a bum rap; that is, up to the point where the many benefits of religious belief leads to a single troublesome question.

Admittedly the thousands of religions past and present were all created by men, but for commendable reasons. Although most are no longer practiced, they each were alluring because they promised to mitigate the mayhem that added evermore pain and suffering to an already brutal existence.

Over the eons, the pantheon of gods fashioned by men and the myths spun by men to make their respective gods believable and beguiling by and large succeeded in making the lives of their followers more purposeful and therefore more tolerable.

The tragedy occurs when some of these followers transition from accepting the religious myths and then inviting others to embrace them to sternly demanding others adhere to these beliefs, or else. It's at this point where religion ceases to be useful to the human race.

The three current ones squabbling among themselves, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, each claim a lineage to the Abraham, a mystical man whose spinmeisters would have us believe took lunch with god in a tent.

Regardless, these three religions have histories replete with murders of those who failed to drop fast enough the god they were currently worshiping to declare fealty to the god being foisted on them.

Intolerant fundamentalists in Islam are neither new nor shocking. Its current extremists who believe they have a right to murder are simply part of the continuum of religious intolerance that has beset mankind since the first god was created, given a name, had certain wondrous attributes ascribed and then revealed by its imaginative creator for others to follow.

The question I am unable to answer is why does profound religious belief foster intense and murdurous intolerance?

Bashir Goth got it perfect with "...any rational human being would place these canonical texts in their historical perspective and realize that they applied to a different time, different world and different circumstances." I wish I could bold the word "rational" here for all the commentators.

Consider this: Some on this page argue that ALL TRUE "ISLAMICS" (an interesting choice of word to refer to Muslims for someone with so much scholarly references at his fingertips) are -- by definition -- terorists. Others say just the opposite, i.e. indiscriminate killing is anti-Islamic.

For example, we are told that the "principle of Al-Takeyya" forces "Islamics" to be dishonest and to be liers. (Interesting that a 19th century, man-made "principle" -- Al-Takeyya -- is used instead of the Quran to make this point.)

To prove this "point", we are quoted "Do not display cowardice, and do not call the infidels to peace when you are superior to them" (Sura 47:22).

Supposedly, according to this, the ".. koran even commands you to lie."

What "rational" rubbish is this?

A rational person would see this as a rational behavior EVERYWHERE. From Great Britian to Russia, Iran to the United States, Israel to Palestinians, ... is there ANYONE who comes out saying "oh no, we are scared, if you attack, we are ready to collapse"???? Even when things are going real bad (and I mean brain-dead-obvious-bad), democratically elected leaders of civilized and enlightened societies still promote policies that counter obvious reality. Why? Psychology is at the center of competition of all kinds as every rational person knows. If you can make your rival loose hope, then you can score an easier victory. Duh?

The same things happen between rival companies (AirBus and Boeing, oil companies, Yahoo and Google, etc.); no one wants to give their rivals the benefit of the pschycological advantage (not without a fight anyway).

Also, since the charge of "commanding lies" is made against Islam only, we would have to conclude that non-Muslim never tell any lies -- not even white lies to get out of sticky situation, like about cheating, a conflict at work, being late to a meeting, the virtues of trickle-down economics, etc. I have been watching my tax money get wasted on ... a bunch of lies: WMDs (and democracy) in Iraq, the "need" for tax cuts for the super-duper rich, all sorts of corrupt allocation of resources, tobacco's benefit to society, etc. by politicians that pay lip service to family values while putting the moves on under-age interns or getting busy with call girls.

Examples/references supposedly demonstrating that Islam is hell-bent on the ruin of humanity (what else do you get when you have 1.5 billion terrorists?), only prove how down-to-earth and rational Islam really is and that THEY are the ones that have real problems.

Islam is very contextual: The Quran goes to agonizing lengths to set the stage for a message or theme that is supposed to guide our behavior. It is saying that there are lofty ambitions, but on earth, no one is Superman. In fact, the Prophet Muhamed is not considered to be divine in any part or respect; he is down right human and can only be expected to act and think like one. If God himself could not find a way to fix mankinds vices and evil-doing tendencies with two religions, how can anyone RATIONALLY expect a man to achieve it in a few short decades? By leading Islam, the Prophet performed a revolution and as all revolutions there were explosive events. But, what was most important was the need to stop the massive injustices and dysfunctional ways of life. As a mortal, the Prophet had little time to explain and let things "sink in". After he would pass away, the gains could be lost. Without Godly powers, power of magic, and TV, no rational person would expect so many people to change their ways so quickly and so completely. By the way, is there any rational person here that thinks the French Revolution was a mistake?

So, to those who are rational, the Quran would be much more in line with the following ways of thinking:

- if you are captured in battle by the enemy, then you lie so that your side is not compromised, not just for the sake of lying whenever you can or feel like it. Who would recommend that we pour our hearts out to enemies?

- Organize and behave intelligently (think ahead, follow leadership and purpose) so that others who are your rivals/enemies are at least not certain about the negative state you may be in -- i.e. knowledge is power.

- Do not AUTOMATICALLY give up your bargaining chips just for the sake of being gracious or appearing as such. For every victory comes at some sacrifice and it is not necessarily the right of the ones sitting at the table to engage entirely individually; they have to think of short-term and long-term consequences, not just appearing good to historians. After all, tables can turn and you may find yourself in a weak situation against an enemy that will not be kind or competent. Even Napoleon lost eventually; everyone can loose (and if history repeats, then they will eventually). Also, the weak/loosing side may do IRRATIONAL things since they may think they have nothing left to loose; so, it may be NECESSARY to take severe action so they do not have a chance to act on their impulses. Otherwise, if he were to be captured, is there a rational justification to give Osama Bin-Laden porole???

No rational person with the slightest awareness of history and recent world events would interpret this type of behavior/thinking as being inherently violent, evil, etc. A rational person would also see similarities between the rise of men like Hitler and Stalin and the rise of Bin-Ladens, especially with rampant chaos (failed or teetering states all over), fear, poverty, and ecological ruin all over.

Looking back at the bloody mess we call human history, the Quran (Islam) is as rational as it gets, it has no illusions... of course, if you are looking at it rationally.

We comparing body counts now? There's light at the end of the tunnel....

"i like islamics and many use that term and i shall too."

Nothing wrong with that. I use "Christers" all the time!

"i like islamics and many use that term and i shall too." Nothing wrong with that. I use "Christers" all the time!

Maybe some Christians murder in the name of Jesus.

But that number pales in comparison to the number who murder in the name of allah.

Idiots.

unquote:

And sorry I forgot:

Tell that to the millions of Jews exterminated by the Germans aided and abetted by the Vatican and the Catholic Church.

Re: Maybe some Christians murder in the name of Jesus.

But that number pales in comparison to the number who murder in the name of allah.

Idiots.

unquote:

Yup, tell that to the families of the 10 million Indo Chinese we killed during the Vietnam War years!

Re: Maybe some Christians murder in the name of Jesus.

But that number pales in comparison to the number who murder in the name of allah.

Idiots.

unquote:

Yup, tell that to the families of the 10 millions Indo Chinese we killed during the Vietnam War years!

Frank Collins:

I thought you were a low caste Hindu an "untouchable". Now I belong to a high caste north Indian Brahamin lineage that converted to Islam.

Islam is a universal religion.
It has won followers all over the world.
It transcends all national,ethnic and linguistic boundaries.

His name was Mohammad which means the praised one.
He is the most successful and the most influential man in all history.
He is the sole author of the Koran (in the secular mind).
He was not a poet or a dreamer.
From the moment he led his rag tag army of 313 against the 1000 seasoned warriors of the Meccans at the Battle of Badr,he changed the history of mankind.
For 1.5 Billion Muslims he is the most revered and they proclaim his name 5 times a day.
They fast for a month and honor Abraham at Mecca during the annual pilgrimage.
The Koran is recited daily x5 by devoted muslims
there millions who have memorised the whole Koran (6666 verses)and are called Hafiz (can recite from begining to end and from in between).
Muslims all over the world belonging to hundreds of nationalities or linguistic groups pray in Arabic- the language of Mohammad.
No man in History has greater hold on his followers.

Now fast forward to our current events.
It is not the time of bows and arrows or the spear and the sword.

Now you have F16 aircraft that can bomb or throw napalm.

To me it is all about weaponry and will power.
Now the West is superior in weaponry. Will it have the will power to stay.

Remember a 17 year old Arab general who conquered Sind and Punjab (present day Pakistan)in the 7th century had the will power but not much superiority in weaponry.
In less than 2 years with only 6000 men he sailed from Basra, conquered and changed the map of the Subcontinent probably for ever.
Tell that to Paul L.Bremer (who also ruled for similar period of time).

Where were you when Muslims mainly from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia and aided and abetted by the USA were killing and maiming Russian soldiers in Afghanistan all in the name of Jihad against the Kufars?

Were you applauding or hiding under the bed?

Shame on you.

You mock the Holy Prophet (PBUH) by claiming:

Mohammad could only promise mystical rewards....

Who needs god, when we can all carry him in our back pockets to do our bidding. We are still arguing about tall tales told by some dead men over a thousand years ago. We don't need to find a middle ground where there is none, what we need is a time machine that can carry back those who wish to return to the good old days of holy wars and leave the rest of us alone....The only problem with my wish is that no one needs a time machine to go back in time, we are already there!
Great piece Bashir, I salute you.

Halakhah, that is the legal system of classical Judaism - as practiced by virtually all Jews from the 9th century to the end of the 18th and as maintained to this very day in the form of Orthodox Judaism - is based primarily on the Babylonian Talmud. Below are the rules on Murder & Genocide.

Murder and Genocide

ACCORDING TO THE JEWISH religion, the murder of a Jew is a capital offense and one of the three most heinous sins (the other two being idolatry and adultery). Jewish religious courts and secular authorities are commanded to punish, even beyond the limits of the ordinary administration of justice, anyone guilty of murdering a Jew. A Jew who indirectly causes the death of another Jew is, however, only guilty of what talmudic law calls a sin against the 'laws of Heaven', to be punished by God rather than by man.

When the victim is a Gentile, the position is quite different. A Jew who murders a Gentile is guilty only of a sin against the laws of Heaven, not punishable by a court.1 To cause indirectly the death of a Gentile is no sin at all.2

Thus, one of the two most important commentators on the Shulhan Arukh explains that when it comes to a Gentile, 'one must not lift one's hand to harm him, but one may harm him indirectly, for instance by removing a ladder after he had fallen into a crevice .., there is no prohibition here, because it was not done directly:3 He points out, however, that an act leading indirectly to a Gentile's death is forbidden if it may cause the spread of hostility towards Jews.4

A Gentile murderer who happens to be under Jewish jurisdiction must be executed whether the victim was Jewish or not. However, if the victim was Gentile and the murderer converts to Judaism, he is not punished.5

All this has a direct and practical relevance to the realities of the State of Israel. Although the state's criminal laws make no distinction between Jew and Gentile, such distinction is certainly made by Orthodox rabbis, who in guiding their flock follow the Halakhah. Of special importance is the advice they give to religious soldiers.

Since even the minimal interdiction against murdering a Gentile outright applies only to 'Gentiles with whom we [the Jews] are not at war', various rabbinical commentators in the past drew the logical conclusion that in wartime all Gentiles belonging to a hostile population may, or even should be killed.6 Since 1973 this doctrine is being publicly propagated for the guidance of religious Israeli soldiers. The first such official exhortation was included in a booklet published by the Central Region Command of the Israeli Army, whose area includes the West Bank. In this booklet the Command's Chief Chaplain writes:

When our forces come across civilians during a war or in hot pursuit or in a raid, so long as there is no certainty that those civilians are incapable of harming our forces, then according to the Halakhah they may and even should be killed ... Under no circumstances should an Arab be trusted, even if he makes an impression of being civilized ... In war, when our forces storm the enemy, they are allowed and even enjoined by the Halakhah to kill even good civilians, that is, civilians who are ostensibly good.7

"to live as the Prophet lived in the 14th century"

Wow. He would have been one old Prophet by then.

"According to the Jewish religion, the murder of a Jew is a capital offense and one of the three most heinous sins (the other two being idolatry and adultery). Jewish religious courts and secular authorities are commanded to punish, even beyond the limits of the ordinary administration of justice, anyone guilty of murdering a Jew ... When the victim is a Gentile, the position is quite different. A Jew who murders a Gentile is guilty only of a sin against the laws of Heaven, not punishable by a court. To cause indirectly the death of a Gentile is no sin at all.

"Thus, one of the two most important commentators on the Shulhan 'Arukh explains that when it comes to a Gentile, "one must not lift one's hand to harm him, but one may harm him indirectly, for instance by removing a ladder after he had fallen into a crevice ... there is no prohibition here, because it was not done directly." ...

"A Gentile murderer who happens to be under Jewish jurisdiction must be executed whether the victim was Jewish or not. However, if the victim was Gentile and the murderer converts to Judaism, he is not punished."

Again, the Talmud:
"In 1962 a part of the Maimonidean Code ... the so-called Book of Knowledge, which contains the most basic rules of Jewish faith and practice, was published in Jerusalem in a bilingual edition, with the English translation facing the Hebrew text. The latter has been restored to its original purity, and the command to exterminate Jewish infidels appears in it in full: "It is a duty to exterminate them with one's own hands." In the English translation this is somewhat softened to: "It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them." But then the Hebrew text goes on to specify the prime examples of "infidels"who must be exterminated: "Such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoqand Baitos [the founders of the Sadducean sect] and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot." Not one word of this appears in the English text on the facing page (78a). And, even more significant, in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the English-speaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception."

Martin Luther wrote in 1543:

"Does not their Talmud say, and do not their rabbis write, that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a heathen, but it is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel? It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal and rob, as they do with their usury, from a heathen is a divine service. For they hold that they cannot be too hard on us nor sin against us, because they are of the noble blood and circumcised saints; we, however, are cursed goyim. And they are the masters of the world, and we are their servants, yea, their cattle...

"Should someone think that I am saying too much, I am not saying too much, but much too little. For I see in their writings how they curse us goyim and wish us all evil in their schools and their prayers."

Mr. Goth, Great essay! As Jesus said, "Blessed are the peacemakers." I honor you for it. May God bless you for it and protect you.

Frank Collins: I think that you must believe that you are somehow doing God's work in tearing down Islam. But the closest Jesus or any of the New Testament apostles come to insulting other religions is probably Paul in his speech to the Athenians, and even here, he is very moderate in speech. Think of Paul's impassioned testimony before Agrippa, Bernice, and Festus in Acts 26, to which King Agrippa replied, "Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian." His words, even while he was in chains, were edifying and uplifting. Jesus and the early apostles were living embodiments of 1 Corinthinans 13, "Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things." Your attacks on Islam, however, incite hatred, and are likely to push people away from Christianity and Christians.

Thank you, Mr. Goth, for your extremely well-written essay on Islamic extremism. I believe you are making valuable contributions to this very important discussion.

Now, having read the commentary on Mr. Goth's article, I invite us all to stop and take a few deep breaths. This is a very heated, difficult, complicated topic. And an urgent one in the world in which we are living. We will not easily come to grips with the daunting challenge of Islamic fundamentalism. It will take deep investigation, courage, insight, and creativity.

All of the world's major religions have had their fundamentalist movements, their wars, and their terrible distortions and misrepresentations. And all of the world's major religions have grown and changed across the centuries. To speak of "Islam" or of "Christianity" or of "Judaism," etc., as such is problematic at best. Which Islam? Whose Christianity? What movement of Judaism? And so forth, and so on.

But all of the world's major religions have made their contributions as well to the good, to peace, to civilization, to prosperity, to hope. In other words, they (we) all have mixed legacies. And mixed modern day manifestations as well, to be sure. I invite us all to take this opportunity to give up once and for all trying to prove that any one religion is superior to another. This is such a waste of time and so pointless that it will never contribute to solving the urgent problems of the day.

The Prophet Mohammed clearly is a complex and contradictory figure. He is, to the best of my knowledge, the only founder of the world's extant great religions who was also a great warrior and general. Simply on a factual basis, the same cannot be said of Jesus of Nazareth, Abraham, Moses, Siddhartha Gautama, and so on. I suppose I really don't know that much yet about Hinduism, so I may be mistaken in that case.

However, to jump from the fact that Mohammed was indeed a military leader to some kind of assertion that Islam is therefore inferior and inherently barbaric is ridiculous and counter-productive. Didn't Israel have the warrior king David, even if he didn't found Judaism? Didn't Christianity have the many Crusades? Didn't the Hindus and the Buddhists fight each other in civil war in Sri Lanka? We've all got theological ancestors with blood on their hands. Let's move on from this point.

Mohammed's legacy and that of the Holy Koran seem to me as a non-Muslim and non-scholar to clearly be quite mixed. I have read passages in an English translation of the Koran (a true Koran may only be written in Arabic, copied by a scribe in an ages-old tradition -- this is very much like the Jewish tradition of reproducing Torah scrolls) in which Mohammed refers to the Jews in friendly, comradely ways. And there are the passages hostile to the Jews, alas. Also, I understand from my Sufi Muslim friends and teachers that Mohammed states somewhere in the Koran that, of the 99 names for Allah, the two most important are "rahim" and "rahman." These translate to "mercy" and "compassion."

Isn't it possible that Mohammed saw the necessity of uniting the endlessly warring tribes of Arabs in what is now Saudi Arabia in order to bring peace, prosperity, and civilization to the Arab world? And that he found no other way in that time and place but to be a general on the battlefield? And that once the war was won, he did all he could in Mecca, Medina, and elsewhere to bring about a brighter future for all? He clearly made common cause with the Jews in the area for some time. I suspect that some disagreement or other with them which is not detailed in the Koran led Mohammed to become very, very angry with them. Tragically.

All my suppositions may be wrong, naturally. But I do know this: many years of careful, painstaking, reflective scholarship about the Hebrew Bible and Christian Bible have yielded great insights about who actually (or probably) wrote various passages in various books. The excellent book "The Five Gospels" by Funk, Hoover, and The Jesus Seminar come to mind. As do the writings of the Talmud, the Midrash, the Responsa, etc. for the interpretation of the Hebrew Bible. Does a comparable body of scholarship exist for Islam? If not, I submit it is time for the Muslim world to take that plunge and delve into these matters.

I don't mean to offend any Muslim who may be reading this commentary -- really, I don't! -- but what if more than one person wrote the Holy Koran? Or what if it really was dictated by Allah to Mohammed and then by Mohammed to his scribe, but the writings were later altered / adulterated? Such things have happened endless times in the history of other religions.

What are we to do in the 21st Century C.E. to meet the challenge of Islamic extremist radicals (and terrorists) such as Sayyid Abul A’la Al Mawdudi of Pakistan and Sayyid Qutub of Egypt? And the Mullah Mohammed Omar of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan? These are very troubling questions. And no matter how much we might want to belive that there are easy answers, that is simply not the case. But willfully misunderstanding each other as entire religions and entire peoples will offer no help whatsoever in building a future in which our children and grandchildren will be safe from terrorism and where all the people of the world, religious and non-religious, will live in peace and harmony. Or at least to make real progress in that direction!

Ignorance in America and Europe of the true history and modern day existence of Islam is very great and awfully troubling. Far too many Americans and Europeans do not know that the country with the most Muslims is not Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, or Iran. It is Indonesia. Indeed, most Muslims in the world are not Arabs. And the next largest Muslim populations belong (in other) to Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, and Turkey. None of these are Arab countries. None of these are the homelands of Osama (from Saudia Arabia), Saddam (from Iraq), or the infamous 19 terrorists who blew up the Twin Towers in New York (15 from Saudia Arabia, 2 from the U.A.E., 1 from Egypt, and 1 from Lebanon). Indeed, of the top 10 countries in the world by Muslim population, only two of them are in the Middle East at all: Iran (also not an Arab country) and Egypt. We have constructed far too many stereotypes and unrealistic images of Islam, and this must stop. After all, there are an estimated 1.3 billion Muslims in the world, including around 7 million in the U.S.A. (now slightly more than the number of Jews in America). They're not going anywhere. We all must learn to live together in peace.

That having been said, there is no question in my mind that, in the short run, in order to protect innocent civilians, the strategic and discriminating use of law enforecement, special forces operations, force protection for key allies and embassies, and intelligence on an international scale are absolutely essential. And this must be done in a multilateral atmosphere, not a lumbering, arrogant, swaggering unilateralist fashion. That is counterproductive in the short, medium, and long term, plain and simple.

We must support and empower those Muslims everywhere who are struggling to be heard with their moderate and progressive voices. And some of them are indeed Arabs: think of King Abdullah II of Jordan, President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, Dr. Mubarak Awab (a Palestinian emigree living in the U.S.A. who founded Nonviolence International), Ibrahim Ramey of the Muslim American Society, Sudanese Peace Activist Safa Elagib Adam, and on, and on.

I accept on faith that the enormous majority of Muslims worldwide want many of the same things that most Westerners (indeed, many of them ARE Westerners) do: the chance for a decent job, a good home to live in, a safe neighborhood in which to raise children, decent schools, a secure retirement, a clean environment, peace, and some free time to study, enjoy, and ponder the meaning of it all. Don't give bin Laden and others like him the satisfaction of confusing and intimidating you into believing that most Muslims everywhere are al Qaeda types. It's just not true.
After all, one of the Five Pillars of Islam, observed by Muslims of all kinds around the globe, is generosity, i.e. giving alms to the poor. That's an act of hope and responsiblity, not of terrorism.

The history of Islam is long and filled with many wonders and some terrors, much like that of the other two Abrahamic faiths, Christianity and Judaism. As for the wonders, do you know who the founder of algebra was? The scholar from whose name we get the words algebra and the algorithm? That would be Muḥammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī (Arabic: محمد بن موسى الخوارزمي), a Persian mathematician, astronomer, astrologer and geographer (780-850 C.E.) who was born in Khwārizm (now Khiva, Uzbekistan) who lived and worked most of his life as a scholar in Baghdad (thank you to Wikipedia for this). And then there are the great mystics of Islam, like the widely celebrated Sufi poets Rumi and Hafiz, who are so wonderfully spiritual, universal, and loving. And on and on it goes.

We have only one little planet to share, and with the combined threats of religious fundamentalism (regardless of the religion in question), terrorism, nuclear proliferation, global warming, exponential world population growth, threats to the supply of food and water for humanity, and so on, we really must call on the best in each of us, the best in whatever religion we may be part of, the best in our families and communities and workplaces, in order to meet these challenges as one diverse human species -- but united in a common desire to survive, to prosper, and to grow in wisdom and understanding. And I do believe that what unites us will prove, in the end, to be stronger than what divides us. But only if we struggle with the challenge, only if we apply ourselves fully to the task.

May it be so.

Salam aleykum,

David
Durham, NC

inane:
so now you want to impose your date system on us too?
now going to happen abdula.
and even if we use your stupid assertion - the rapist moho did not live in the 14th century, it would have been the 1st century if you have your own calendar, which you dont.
lying islamic scum - cant you ever tell the truth?

It is an historical fact that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain, if they would relinquish all their property in Germany and Occupied France; on condition that: a) none of the deportees travel from Spain to Palestine; and b) all the deportees be transported from Spain to the USA or British colonies, and there to remain; with entry visas to be arranged by the Jews living there; and c) $1000.00 ransom for each family to be furnished by the Agency, payable upon the arrival of the family at the Spanish border at the rate of 1000 families daily.

The Zionist leaders in Switzerland and Turkey received this offer with the clear understanding that the exclusion of Palestine as a destination for the deportees was based on an agreement between the Gestapo and the Mufti.

The answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments: a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees. b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a "Jewish State" at the end of the war. c) No ransom will be paid This response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber.

These treacherous Zionist leaders betrayed their own flesh and blood. Zionism was never an option for Jewish salvation. Quite the opposite, it was a formula for human beings to be used as pawns for the power trip of several desperadoes. A perfidy! A betrayal beyond description!

In 1944, at the time of the Hungarian deportations, a similar offer was made, whereby all Hungarian Jewry could be saved. The same Zionist hierarchy again refused this offer (after the gas chambers had already taken a toll of millions).

The British government granted visas to 300 rabbis and their families to the Colony of Mauritius, with passage for the evacuees through Turkey. The "Jewish Agency" leaders sabotaged this plan with the observation that the plan was disloyal to Palestine, and the 300 rabbis and their families should be gassed.

On December 17, 1942 both houses of the British Parliament declared its readiness to find temporary refuge for endangered persons. The British Parliament proposed to evacuate 500,000 Jews from Europe, and resettle them in British colonies, as a part of diplomatic negotiations with Germany. This motion received within two weeks a total of 277 Parliamentary signatures. On Jan. 27, when the next steps were being pursued by over 100 M.P.'s and Lords, a spokesman for the Zionists announced that the Jews would oppose the motion because Palestine was omitted. [Source]

On Feb. 16, 1943 Roumania offered 70,000 Jewish refugees of the Trans-Dniestria to leave at the cost of $50 each. This was publicized in the New York papers. Yitzhak Greenbaum, Chairman of the Rescue Committee of the Jewish Agency, addressing the Zionist Executive Council in Tel Aviv Feb. 18 1943 said, "when they asked me, "couldn't you give money out of the United Jewish Appeal funds for the rescue of Jews in Europe, I said NO! and I say again, NO!...one should resist this wave which pushes the Zionist activities to secondary importance." On Feb. 24, 1943 Stephen Wise, President of the American Jewish Congress and leader of the American Zionists issued a public refusal to this offer and declared no collection of funds would seem justified. In 1944, the Emergency Committee to Save the Jewish People called upon the American government to establish a War Refugee Board. Stephen Wise testifying before a special committee of Congress objected to this proposal. [Source]

During the course of the negotiations mentioned above, Chaim Weizman, the first "Jewish statesman" stated: "The most valuable part of the Jewish nation is already in Palestine, and those Jews living outside Palestine are not too important". Weizman's cohort, Greenbaum, amplified this statement with the observation "One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Europe".

And then, after the bitterest episode in Jewish history, these Zionist "statesmen" lured the broken refugees in the DP camps to remain in hunger and deprivation, and to refuse relocation to any place but Palestine; only for the purpose of building their State.

In 1947 Congressman William Stration sponsored a bill to immediately grant entry to the United States of 400,000 displaced persons. The bill was not passed after it was publicly denounced by the Zionist leadership. [Source]

These facts are read with consternation and unbearable shame. How can it be explained that at a time during the last phase of the war, when the Nazis were willing to barter Jews for money, partly because of their desires to establish contact with the Western powers which, they believed, were under Jewish influence, how was it possible one asks that the self-proclaimed "Jewish leaders" did not move heaven and earth to save the last remnant of their brothers?

On Feb. 23, 1956 the Hon. J. W. Pickersgill, Minister for Immigration was asked in the Canadian House of Commons "would he open the doors of Canada to Jewish refugees". He replied "the government has made no progress in that direction because the government of Israel....does not wish us to do so". [Source]

In 1972, the Zionist leadership successfully opposed an effort in the United States Congress to allow 20,000-30,000 Russian refugees to enter the United States. Jewish relief organizations, Joint and HIAS, were being pressured to abandon these refugees in Vienna, Rome and other Europiean cities. [Source]
The pattern is clear!!! Humanitarian rescue efforts are subverted to narrow Zionist interests.

There were many more shocking crimes committed by these abject degenerates known as "Jewish statesmen", we could list many more example, but for the time being let anyone produce a valid excuse for the above facts.

Zionist responsibility for the Holocaust is threefold.

It is an historical fact that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain, if they would relinquish all their property in Germany and Occupied France; on condition that: a) none of the deportees travel from Spain to Palestine; and b) all the deportees be transported from Spain to the USA or British colonies, and there to remain; with entry visas to be arranged by the Jews living there; and c) $1000.00 ransom for each family to be furnished by the Agency, payable upon the arrival of the family at the Spanish border at the rate of 1000 families daily.

The Zionist leaders in Switzerland and Turkey received this offer with the clear understanding that the exclusion of Palestine as a destination for the deportees was based on an agreement between the Gestapo and the Mufti.

The answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments: a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees. b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a "Jewish State" at the end of the war. c) No ransom will be paid This response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber.

These treacherous Zionist leaders betrayed their own flesh and blood. Zionism was never an option for Jewish salvation. Quite the opposite, it was a formula for human beings to be used as pawns for the power trip of several desperadoes. A perfidy! A betrayal beyond description!

In 1944, at the time of the Hungarian deportations, a similar offer was made, whereby all Hungarian Jewry could be saved. The same Zionist hierarchy again refused this offer (after the gas chambers had already taken a toll of millions).

The British government granted visas to 300 rabbis and their families to the Colony of Mauritius, with passage for the evacuees through Turkey. The "Jewish Agency" leaders sabotaged this plan with the observation that the plan was disloyal to Palestine, and the 300 rabbis and their families should be gassed.

On December 17, 1942 both houses of the British Parliament declared its readiness to find temporary refuge for endangered persons. The British Parliament proposed to evacuate 500,000 Jews from Europe, and resettle them in British colonies, as a part of diplomatic negotiations with Germany. This motion received within two weeks a total of 277 Parliamentary signatures. On Jan. 27, when the next steps were being pursued by over 100 M.P.'s and Lords, a spokesman for the Zionists announced that the Jews would oppose the motion because Palestine was omitted. [Source]

On Feb. 16, 1943 Roumania offered 70,000 Jewish refugees of the Trans-Dniestria to leave at the cost of $50 each. This was publicized in the New York papers. Yitzhak Greenbaum, Chairman of the Rescue Committee of the Jewish Agency, addressing the Zionist Executive Council in Tel Aviv Feb. 18 1943 said, "when they asked me, "couldn't you give money out of the United Jewish Appeal funds for the rescue of Jews in Europe, I said NO! and I say again, NO!...one should resist this wave which pushes the Zionist activities to secondary importance." On Feb. 24, 1943 Stephen Wise, President of the American Jewish Congress and leader of the American Zionists issued a public refusal to this offer and declared no collection of funds would seem justified. In 1944, the Emergency Committee to Save the Jewish People called upon the American government to establish a War Refugee Board. Stephen Wise testifying before a special committee of Congress objected to this proposal. [Source]

During the course of the negotiations mentioned above, Chaim Weizman, the first "Jewish statesman" stated: "The most valuable part of the Jewish nation is already in Palestine, and those Jews living outside Palestine are not too important". Weizman's cohort, Greenbaum, amplified this statement with the observation "One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Europe".

And then, after the bitterest episode in Jewish history, these Zionist "statesmen" lured the broken refugees in the DP camps to remain in hunger and deprivation, and to refuse relocation to any place but Palestine; only for the purpose of building their State.

In 1947 Congressman William Stration sponsored a bill to immediately grant entry to the United States of 400,000 displaced persons. The bill was not passed after it was publicly denounced by the Zionist leadership. [Source]

These facts are read with consternation and unbearable shame. How can it be explained that at a time during the last phase of the war, when the Nazis were willing to barter Jews for money, partly because of their desires to establish contact with the Western powers which, they believed, were under Jewish influence, how was it possible one asks that the self-proclaimed "Jewish leaders" did not move heaven and earth to save the last remnant of their brothers?

On Feb. 23, 1956 the Hon. J. W. Pickersgill, Minister for Immigration was asked in the Canadian House of Commons "would he open the doors of Canada to Jewish refugees". He replied "the government has made no progress in that direction because the government of Israel....does not wish us to do so". [Source]

In 1972, the Zionist leadership successfully opposed an effort in the United States Congress to allow 20,000-30,000 Russian refugees to enter the United States. Jewish relief organizations, Joint and HIAS, were being pressured to abandon these refugees in Vienna, Rome and other Europiean cities. [Source]
The pattern is clear!!! Humanitarian rescue efforts are subverted to narrow Zionist interests.

There were many more shocking crimes committed by these abject degenerates known as "Jewish statesmen", we could list many more example, but for the time being let anyone produce a valid excuse for the above facts.

Zionist responsibility for the Holocaust is threefold.

As someone already pointed out, every religious person believes that his/her faith is the one true religion. If you thought someone else's religion was truer than yours, you'd switch!

Adherents of Judaism, Christianity and Islam have been victims of mass murder and have also been mass murderers. Mass murder has been committed under the auspices of religion for "holy" reasons and practical reasons (to obtain territory, wealth, food, slaves, etc). To deny this or to claim that one of these three religions is "worse" than the other is to be deluded.

Islam has been ripped apart from within by extremists. Muslims murder Muslims. The Islamists and the fanatics cannot heal Islam, only the moderate and thus far silent majority can do so. Until their voices are united in condemnation of the spreading of poison and division within Islam, until the moderate restrain the extreme, there will be little peace in their world. Until there is peace within Islam, the Muslim world cannot successfully take its place in the international community.

Your Prophet is a Devil. There is absolutely no religious benefit from Killing, if you justify Killing of non-believers, enemies or friends out of Anger and Hatred you are not on a religious path but the path of the DEVIL. You will not get positive results from negative acts, just like you can't grow sweet grains from poison seeds.

It wasn't good at any time. At all times, "Thou Shall not Kill!"

What you never knew that?

"Love your enemy"

but for you, its Kill and enjoy happiness and peace, that never works for anyone, why would you expect that it will work for you.

This charismatic individual, the Rebbe of Satmar, Grand Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum, did not mince any words. Straight to the point he called Zionism "the work of Satan", "a sacrilege" and "a blasphemy". He forbade any participation with anything even remotely associated with Zionism and said that Zionism was bound to call the wrath of G-d upon His people. He maintained this stance with unwavering bravery from the onset of Zionism whilst he was still in Hungary up until his death in New York where he lead a congregation numbering in the hundreds of thousands. Grand Rabbi Teitelbaum, scion to a legacy of holy mystics and Hassidic Masters unfortunately had his prediction fulfilled. We lost more than six million of our brothers, sisters, sons and daughters in a very horrible manner. This, more than six million holy people had to experience as punishment for the Zionist stupidity. The Holocaust, he wept, was a direct result of Zionism, a punishment from G-d.

IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT ALL THE SAGES AND SAINTS IN EUROPE AT THE TIME OF HITLER'S RISE DECLARED THAT HE WAS A MESSENGER OF DIVINE WRATH, SENT TO CHASTEN THE JEWS BECAUSE OF THE BITTER APOSTASY OF ZIONISM AGAINST THE BELIEF IN THE EVENTUAL MESSIANIC REDEMPTION.

But it doesn't end there. It wasn't enough for the Zionist leaders to have aroused the wrath of G-d. They made a point of displaying abysmal contempt for their Jewish brothers and sisters by actively participating in their extermination. Just the idea alone of Zionism, which the rabbis had informed them would cause havoc, was not enough for them. They made an effort to pour fuel on an already burning flame. They had to incite the Angel of Death, Adolf Hitler. They took the liberty of telling the world that they represented World Jewry. Who appointed these individuals as leaders of the Jewish People?? It is no secret that these so-called "leaders" were ignoramuses when it came to Judaism. Atheists and racists too. These are the "statesmen" who organized the irresponsible boycott against Germany in 1933. This boycott hurt Germany like a fly attacking an elephant - but it brought calamity upon the Jews of Europe. At a time when America and England were at peace with the mad-dog Hitler, the Zionist "statesmen" forsook the only plausible method of political amenability; and with their boycott incensed the leader of Germany to a frenzy. Genocide began, but these people, if they can really be classified as members of the human race, sat back.

"No Shame"

President Roosevelt convened the Evian conference July 6-15 1938, to deal with the Jewish refugee problem. The Jewish Agency delegation headed by Golda Meir (Meirson) ignored a German offer to allow Jews to emigrate to other countries for $250 a head, and the Zionists made no effort to influence the United States and the 32 other countries attending the conference to allow immigration of German and Austrian Jews. [Source]

On Feb 1, 1940 Henry Montor executive vice-President of the United Jewish Appeal refused to intervene for a shipload of Jewish refugees stranded on the Danube river, stating that "Palestine cannot be flooded with... old people or with undesirables." [Source]

more islamic liberation here:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2007.htm
change the date from 2007 to 2006 to 2005 to 2004

From its' inception, many rabbis warned of the potential dangers of Zionism and openly declared that all Jews loyal to G-d should stay away from it like one would from fire. They made their opinions clear to their congregants and to the general public. Their message was that Zionism is a chauvinistic racist phenomenon which has absolutely naught to do with Judaism. They publicly expressed that Zionism would definitely be detrimental to the well being of Jews and Gentiles and that its effects on the Jewish religion would be nothing other than destructive. Further, it would taint the reputation of Jewry as a whole and would cause utter confusion in the Jewish and non-Jewish communities. Judaism is a religion. Judaism is not a race or a nationality. That was and still remains the consensus amongst the rabbis.

We were given the Holy Land by G-d in order to be able to study and practice the Torah without disturbance and to attain levels of holiness difficult to attain outside of the Holy Land. We abused the privilege and we were expelled. That is exactly what all Jews say in their prayers on every Jewish festival, "Umipnay chatoenu golinu mayartsaynu" - "Because of our sins we were expelled from our land".

We have been forsworn by G-d "not to enter the Holy Land as a body before the predestined time", "not to rebel against the nations", to be loyal citizens, not to do anything against the will of any nation or its honour, not to seek vengeance, discord, restitution or compensation; "not to leave exile ahead of time." On the contrary; we have to be humble and accept the yoke of exile. To violate the oaths would result in "your flesh will be made prey as the deer and the antelope in the forest," and the redemption will be delayed.

and its all done to impose islam on others:

April 16, 2007
Philippines: 70,000 flee as Muslim leader declares jihad in Sulu province
Severe interior spiritual struggle displaces 70,000. "Philippines: 70,000 People Flee As Muslim Rebel Declares Jihad In Sulu," from AKI, with thanks to Fjordman:

Cotabato City, 16 April (AKI) - At least 70,000 Muslim civilians in the southern Filipino province of Sulu were displaced due to fighting between a faction of former rebel group, the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) and the army. Abdul Wasan Mohamad, provincial social welfare and development officer in Sulu, told Adnkronos International (AKI) that the number may increase as six towns were affected in the ongoing fighting that began when a group of MNLF forces, under leader Habier Malik attacked a Marine base near Panamao, on 13 April. Eighteen people, including two soldiers and a civilian, were killed in the incident.
"Non-government organizations and government agencies have provided evacuees with relief goods and medicines. But if the fighting continues, more and more civilians will be displaced," Mohamad said.

The Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) has asked the military and MNLF to stop the fighting. Reports said the OIC proposed the creation of a small military monitoring mission in Sulu province.

But Jesus Dureza, Filipino president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's peace adviser, said that although they welcomed the concern of OIC, the army will undertake punitive action against Malik's forces. Dureza asked the leadership of MNLF to take appropriate steps and deal with the criminal acts perpetrated by Malik.

"Unless decisively addressed by the MNLF leadership, this latest incident will pose as an additional challenge in our peace engagement with the MNLF," Dureza said in statement.

MNLF deputy chairman Hatimil Hassan told reporters they would respect the appeal of the OIC.

"We have directed Malik's group on the ground to silent their guns. We support the appeal of OIC to cease from further hostilities and resolve the matter in peaceful means," Hassan said.

On 13 April, Malik declared a jihad, or holy war, against Manila and fired rockets on the positions of government security forces near Panamao. His action followed an attack by the army on an MNLF camp in nearby Indanan town, last week.

Hitler and the Zionists had a common goal: to create a world Jewish Ghetto as a solution to the Jewish Question.

Theodor Herzl (1860-1904), the founder of modern Zionism, recognized that anti-Semitism would further his cause, the creation of a separate state for Jews. To solve the Jewish Question, he maintained “we must, above all, make it an international political issue.”[1]Herzl wrote that Zionism offered the world a welcome “final solution of the Jewish question.”[2]In his “Diaries”, page 19, Herzl stated “Anti-Semites will become our surest friends, anti-Semitic countries our allies.”

The Zionist so-called “World Jewish Congress” declared war on the country of Germany,[12] [13] knowing that it would affect their Jewish brothers residing in that country who would be left without protection. When others tried to help them escape to other countries, the Zionist movement took actions which caused those countries to lock their doors to Jewish immigration (read more in the books, “Perfidy” and “Min Hametzer”). As a result of the Zionist influence five ships of Jewish refugees from Germany arriving in the United States were turned back to the gas chambers.

The fundamental aim of the Zionist movement has been not to save Jewish lives but to create a “Jewish state” in Palestine.

On December 7, 1938, Ben Gurion, the first head of the Zionist ‘state of Israel’ declared “If I knew it was possible to save all the children in Germany by taking them to England, and only half of the children by taking them to Eretz Israel, I would choose the second solution. For we must take into account not only the lives of these children but also the history of the people of Israel.”[14]

On August 31, 1949, Ben Gurion stated: “Although we have realized our dream of creating a Jewish State, we are only at the beginning. There are still only 900,000 Jews in Israel, whereas the majority of the Jewish people still remains abroad. Our future task is to bring all the Jews to Israel.”

Of the two and a half million Jews seeking refuge from the Nazis between 1935 and 1943, less than 9% went to settle in Palestine. The vast majority, 75%, went to the Soviet Union. In the mid-70’s, more people emigrated out of ‘Israel’ than came in. The only surges of immigration to the Zionist state have occurred during anti-Semitic threats and persecution in foreign countries.[15]

It follows that for the Zionist state to achieve its goal of a Jewish world ghetto anti-Semitism must be promoted and encouraged, and as we have seen, by acts of violence if necessary.

“To attain its practical objectives, Zionism hopes it will be able to collaborate with a government that is fundamentally hostile to the Jews”.[16]

The use of anti-Semitism as a tool to coerce immigration to the Zionist state continues to the present day:

Prime Minister Sharon has stated that anti-Semitism is on the rise and that the only hope for the safety of Jews is to move to Israel under the protection of the Zionist state. “The best solution to anti-Semitism is immigration to Israel. It is the only place on Earth where Jews can live as Jews," he said.[17]

Those who continue to call the so-called “state of Israel” the “Jewish State” are not only promoting Zionism which is contrary to the beliefs of true Judaism, but also endorsing the promotion of worldwide anti-Semitism. In doing so they are endangering the lives of traditional Jews and denying their civil liberties and human rights.

Goth: "I can understand people rejecting change and determined to continue to live as the Prophet lived in the 14th century."

Skeptic: "I believe that Mr. Goth meant that WE are living in the 14th century. That is correct if your calendar was reset by the events of Mohammed's life, rather than by those of Christ's."

Not a bad interpretation, but Goth is most likely referring to the Puritanical teachings of Ibn Taymiyyah, who did live in the 14th century. Taymiyyah is widely considered the founder of Islamic radicalism as we know it today.

and lets hear it for islamic motherhood - how liberating.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw2EisVqKZ4&mode=related&search=
48 seconds into this is a little girl of 3 or 4 who has been taught to hate jews.
and in another part the children are told to go out and kill jews.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhbHVEGnYD8&mode=related&search= and 45 seconds into this one a 2 year old says jews are apes and pigs and must be killed.
when i say that only the unborn are innocent when we discuss islamics - i dont make it up.

lets look at how liberating islam really is - from the mouth of islam itself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b32piz5fMk8&NR=1 she only wants to serve allah and does not care about peace on earth just murder - called Suicide Killers
AND 6 SERMONS FROM PEACEFUL ISLAMICS IN THE WEST - ALL FROM THE MOUTH OF ISLAMIC SCUM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFQWuk4nuo&mode=related&search=

hey lets talk crusades.
i posted a date by date history of islam's first 50 years. murder after murder. now here is a summary of what lead up to the crusades.
The first Crusade began in 1095… 460 years after the first Christian city was overrun by Muslim armies, 457 years after Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies, 453 years after Egypt was taken by Muslim armies, 443 after Muslims first plundered Italy, 427 years after Muslim armies first laid siege to the Christian capital of Constantinople, 380 years after Spain was conquered by Muslim armies, 363 years after France was first attacked by Muslim armies, 249 years after Rome itself was sacked by a Muslim army, and only after centuries of church burnings, killings, enslavement and forced conversions of Christians.

846 Muslims sacking the capital of the Christian church. During the 8th and 9th centuries, the Arabs (known by mediaeval Italians as the Saracens) had begun to expand into Southern Italy during the Muslim conquest of Southern Italy. These newcomers, sailing from their bases in North Africa, had conquered Sicily and had begun a steady penetration of the peninsula.
Under Pope Paschal I (817-824), all the spoils of the holy martyrs were transferred into the walls of the city. When Rome was finally sacked in 846, Paschal's preparation did not prevent the robbery of Basilica of Saint Peter itself, nor of another major basilica, San Paolo fuori le Mura, both of which were outside the ancient fortifications.

To prevent a second such incident, in 852 Pope Leo IV commissioned the construction of another wall (so-called Leonine Wall) around an area on the opposite side of the Tiber from the seven hills of Rome. This enclosure has since become known as the Leonine City.

additionally - The Islamic conquest and domination of Sicily, as well as parts of southern Italy, is a process whose origin must be traced back in the general expansion of Islam from the 7th century onwards.

The first attacks from Islamic ships to Sicily, then part of the Eastern Roman Empire, occurred in 652: they were Arabs from Syria, led by Mu'àuia ibn-Hodeig of the Kinda tribe, and remained on the island for several years. The Byzantine exarch of Ravenna Olympius also came to Sicily but were unable to oust the invaders, who returned to Syria after collecting a large booty.

A second expedition occurred in 669. This time the strong, ravaging force consisted of 200 ships from Alexandria. They sacked Syracuse and returned to Egypt after a month of pillaging. After the Umayyad conquest of Africa (complete around 700), attacks from Muslim fleets repeated in 703, 728, 729, 730, 731, 733 and 734, the last two times meeting with a substantial Byzantine resistance.

The first true conquest expedition was launched in 740: in that year the Muslim prince Habib, who participated on the 728 attack, and his son Abdurrahman, after a successful siege of Syracuse, were ready to conquer the whole island when they were called back to Tunisia by a Berber revolt. A second attack in 752 aimed only to sack the city.

In 805 the Imperial patrician of Sicily, Constantine, signed a ten years truce with Ibrahim I ibn al-Aghlab, Emir of Ifriqiya, but this did not prevent other Muslim fleets from other areas of Africa and Spain to attack Sardinia and Corsica in 806-821. In 812 Ibrahim's son, Abdallah I, sent an invasion force to conquer Sicily. His ships were however pushed back first by the intervention of Gaeta and Amalfi, and later by a tempest which destroyed much of them. However, they managed to conquer the islands of Lampedusa and, in the Tyrrhenian Sea, to ravage Ponza and Ischia. A further agreement between the new patrician Gregorius and the Emir established the freedom of commerce between southern Italy and Ifriqiya. After a further attack by Mohammed ibn-Adballad, cousin of Emir Ziyadat Allah I in 819, no news of subsequent Muslim attack to Sicily are known until 827.
At his point, Sicily was almost entirely in control of Aghlabids, with the exception of some minor strongholds in the rugged interior. The population had been increased by the immigration of Muslims from Africa, Asia and Spain, as well as Berbers, who were most concentrated in the southern of the island. The emir in Palermo nominated the governors of the main cities (qadi) and those of the less important ones (hakim), and the other functionaries. Each city had a council called gema, composed by the most eminent members of the local society, which was entrusted of the care of the public works and of the social order.

The conquered Sicilian population was subjected to the typical discrimination against the Infidel found in most Muslim dominated lands.

****They were permitted freedom of worship, but only if they accepted the inferior status of a dhimmi.****

As dhimmi they were subjected to extra taxation -- the jizya (poll tax) and the kharaj (land tax), which ensured that they were contributing to the upkeep of security and protection that the Muslim armies were providing them. There were restrictions on repairing or building new churches. The dhimmi could not bear arms or ride a horse and were required to wear distinctive clothes so that they could be easily identified as dhimmi. Some converted to Islam in order to leviate the additional taxes that they had to pay. This situation resulted in the spread of Islam among the inhabitants (whether by honest conviction or economic and societal compulsion). However, many Greek Christian communities managed to survive as dhimmi until the arrival of the Normans -- especially in the hill towns of Northeastern Sicily. These Sicilians generally welcomed the Norman invaders.

isn't 500 years of being attacked, sacking rome, enough to warrant a response? not if your islamic.

Wow... it's shocking how much intolerance is represented by the fundie christians in response to Mr. Goths well-written essay. They should be ashamed to call themselves christians. If I recall the mythology of the New Testament correctly, Jesus was tolerant of everyone with the exception of the moneychangers who were defiling the laws of the temple.

Clearly the problem is religion. The more I read idiot posts like those above, the farther I walk away from a belief that there is still a place for religion in this world... despite it being the 21st century. It's amazing that we can still have thinkers of the dark ages co-existing with technological miracles like computers. I wish there weren't so many of these morons we have to share the planet with...

Keeping my fingers crossed that the rapture happens sooner rather than later, since we can really do without all the idiocy of Christian 'believers'...

If God is all seeing through the ages and if God is Allah, then why would he choose a prophet who is married to a six year old girl Aisha who the prophet
Mohamed had sex with when she was nine years old.
Today he would be classified as a pedophile.
Allah or God is the same today as he was then so does this mean Allah condones sex with children ??.

Today it is still possible to marry a nine year old girl in Iran with the consent of the parents and before they changed the laws in Iran in 2002 it was legal to marry a nine year old without her parents consent.
This religion for the want of a better word is the demented imagination of Mohamed, and all the virgins in paradise, now where did they come from are they good Muslim girls ?? and what would their brothers and families think of their actions, seems Mohamed was lost for the answer for this question.
I rest my case.

MORE ISLAMIC LIBERATION HERE:
639AD: Invasion of Egypt by Moslem, Amru.

To 640AD: Arab forces take Palestinian cities such as Dara, Caesarea, Antioch, the isthmus of Suez. Iraq was taken by 637AD. In 639, Egypt was invaded by Moslem Arabs. In 641, Babylon (Old Cairo) was taken. Alexandria was recaptured in 645. By 700AD, Roman Africa was under Moslem control.

640AD: Islam, The Arabs invade Egypt and burn the library of Alexandria . However, the Arabs preserve the use of engineering skills known in Egypt at the time, while Europe remains ignorant.

610AD-641AD: Emperor Heraclius fails to stem the Arab threat and loses Africa, Spain and Northern Italy.

641AD: Islam: Battle of Nehavend, great victory for Islam over Persians, and many Persian nobility come to terms with Islam. Yezdegerd the king flees to a remote corner and holds a vestige of power till about 651-652. Alexandria is captured.

642AD: Islamic invasion of Egypt.

644AD: Islam: Death of Omar succeeded by Othman, a weak ruler who allows Islamic power to fall into the hands of the Koreish nobility.

647AD: Islam: Invasion of Africa by Abdallah, Arabs expel the Romans.

649AD: Islam: Invasion of Cyprus in 649, Conquest of Aradus in 650, Conquest of Armenia in 652, Conquest of Rhodes in 654, in 655 is defeat of emperor Constans by Mohammedans in naval battle off Mt Phoenix in Lycia.

Circa 650AD: Revelations of Mohammed are written; they become The Koran.

656AD: Islam: Murder of Othman by a party in opposition to growing worldliness of Islam. Leader of the opposition, and son-in-law of Mohammed the Prophet, is Ali, who succeeds. Battle of the Camel. Moawiyah, governor of Syria, heads the opponents of Ali, and incites them to revenge.

657AD: Islam: Ali invades northern Syria. Battle of Siffin. The theocratic faction rebels against Ali.

658AD: Islam: Decision of the Umpires, Ali and Moawiyah, the latter wins. Peace made with the Byzantine Empire. Egypt conquered for Moawiyah.

659: Islam: Moslem conquest of Egypt.

AND CURRENTLY HERE IS HOW ISLAM HELPED LIBERATE THE WORLD FROM THE NAZI SCUM - ISLAM JOINED THEM!

http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/

here is what islam did then and now:
how LIBERATING IS THIS
ISLAM - IN THE BEGINING:

622-623AD: Mecca-Medina: Mohammed with followers flees opposition in Mecca and go to Medina. The first mosque is built. Mohammed becomes a warrior.

625AD: Arabia: Battle of Ohod, victory of the Meccans.

624AD: Arabia: First battle for the faith with the Meccans at Bedr. Victory of Mohammed.

628AD: Mohammedan war against the Jews of Khaibar.

629AD: Arabia, Mohammedan war against the Greek subjects in Arabia.

629AD: Emperor Heraclius in Constantinople receives embassies from as far away as France and India, and surprisingly, also a letter (as an apocryphal legend) from an Arabian chieftain and a Prophet of God, Mohammed, suggesting that he join a new faith.

630AD: Arabia, Mohammed moves against Mecca and conquers it. War with the Hawazin. Rapid spread of Islam. The Ka'aba in Mecca, a repository of idols, is cleansed of idols and becomes a building deeply revered by Moslems.

632AD: Death of Mohammed. The Prophet's successor is his father-in-law, Abu Bakr (Abu Bekr) who is chosen Caliph, or representative, and pursues an expansionist policy. Persians are expelled from Bahrein. An army under Khalid sets out against the Byzantine Empire. An Arab army moves up the south coast of Palestine and takes Gaza. Abu Bakr reduces a revolt in Nejd and Yemen, and defends Medina.
634AD: Moslem conquest of Yemen.

635AD: Islam: Moslem capture of Damascus. by 636 are added conquests of Emesa, Heliopolis, Chalcis, Beroae, Edessa, Battle of Yermuk. Heraclius abandons Syria to the Moslems.

636AD: Kingdom of Ghassan (300-636AD): Founded about 300AD by Thalaba, the first to take the name of king. His successors rule until 636, when Djabala VI surrenders to the Mohammedans.

637AD: Arabia: Middle East, Battle of Cadesia, or Kadisiya, Moslem victory over the Persians. Omar captures Jerusalem, then Aleppo and Antioch.

637AD and later: Moslem missionary expansionism had meant that Moslems had intervened at Jerusalem from 637AD. Moslems, partly due to their existing maritime skills, were actually invited into Portugal to help with problems by 711. Later they occupied Toledo. They were on Crete by 826, taking the island from the Byzantines, another obviously maritime adventure. Moslems had intervened in Sind (India) by the early Eighth Century, but they did not dominate Northern India till the Eleventh Century.

637AD: Sasanid power in Iran is broken by Moslem Arabs.

638AD: Mesopotamia is conquered by Islam who also take Tarsus and Diar-Bekr.

YesCorrect:
Well said RICK (above). Good article, but that statement (Islam liberated man from the worship of rocks and sculptures) exposes the author's small-mindedness.
Naveen:
"Islam liberated man from the worship of rocks and sculptures" Poorly stated and deliberately insulting, this and other statements are testament to the self-righteous hypocrisy of such writers.
Neveen and the one before him like to take statements out of context."Islam liberated man from the worship of rocks and sculptures"
That statement is true.
Bashir Goth's statment is refering to citezens of Mecca when the prophet Mohamed(Peace Upon HIm) get the revelation from Alah.That time Arabs of Mecca and Saudi Arabia were worshiping Idols.
Those of you who believe the Abrahamic relgions namely, Jews, Christians, and Muslims do believe Prophet Abraham May Allah Bless his soul when he got the revelations his people including his father worshiped Idols or sculptures.
So were Muslims before Mohamed get the revelation.
I hope we get more religios scholars to make record straight. As the cliche or saying goes" Little Knowledge is dangerous. Let Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Budhist, Confucious, and athiest scholars address this improtant issue so we are not milead or confused by here and say scholars.

Sure is fun to watch you fundie dweebs go at one another. My fondest hope is that you kill one another off, with out disturbing the rest of us.

"Basically, there is no tolerance for hetergenous religious aspirations under Islam. Period." Nope. Nor under fundamentalist Christianity. Nor, under the Pope's latest pronouncements, under Catholicism, either.

"yes there were others, but none of them said kill anyone." Hey, Christer: Ever read Leviticus? You should know the Bible before you make self-righteous idiotic statements.

"It is unfortunate that Islam -- which opened the minds of people to science and research, liberated man from the worship of rocks and sculptures, challenged human beings to think and reflect, which started its message with a veneration of the written word -- has been ossified into a dogma of death and ignorance.". Liberated man from the worship of rocks and sculptures? How different is your pseudo-pacifist interpretation from those of firebrand mullahs? If you are meaning Hindu religion where worshipping forms of Divine including idols is an integral part, then how peace-loving is your view Islam should be "liberating" people from that religion? Science and Arts- yes. But tell me, in the last 1000 years how many states and regions islam has let blossom in their own way? The fundamentalistic interpretation is not a recent one; every hindu in the northern part of India would have an ancestor or lineage of ancestors put to death and tortured 20 generations back. Islam, like any religion that does not accept various forms of Divine, can never be a peace loving religion. If at all if loves peace, only for its followers, not for others. Basically, there is no tolerance for hetergenous religious aspirations under Islam. Period.

Though the entertainment value is very high, if you enjoy torture and slaughter!

Hey, is it so different from the Crusades? "Onward Christian Soldiers?" The Muslims don't have a patent on stupidity, they're just practicing it more obviously now than the Christians. Though the Pope is trying to keep up! Can't tell the players without a scorecard!

Everyone knows that the real God isn't Allah, it's JEEBUS!

Our past is deeper than all your religious books combined. We are a component of life, not excluded from it. Your religion debases the strength and resilence of life and it's ability to evolve depending on the myriad of circumstances, indeed it is beautiful and awesome. Physics,Chemistry and Biology;together.

You cut your nose off despite your face, with your arrogance. Clarence Thomas and Bill Cosby would be proud.

Our past is deeper than all your religious books combined. We are a component of life, not excluded from it. Your religion debases the strength and resilence of life and it's ability to evolve depending on the myriad of circumstances, indeed it is beautiful and awesome. Physics,Chemistry and Biology;together.

You cut your nose off despite your face, with your arrogance. Clarence Thomas and Bill Cosby would be proud.

Our past is deeper than all your religious books combined. We are a component of life, not excluded from it. Your religion debases the strength and resilence of life and it's ability to evolve depending on the myriad of circumstances, indeed it is beautiful and awesome. Physics,Chemistry and Biology;together.

You cut your nose off despite your face, with your arrogance. Clarence Thomas and Bill Cosby would be proud.

This comment is addressed to the Kuffar/Kaffirs whatever. I have given up trying to communicate with moderate/enlightened moderate/liberal/ silent majority Muslims. If only because all you get is: "Those who did this could not have been Muslims, because if they were, they could not have been true Muslims because Islam forbids this (add your own atrocity). Islam is a religion of peace." The only thing missing is "Member FDIC, void where prohibited disclaimer." In other words your standard nauseating exculpatory statement intended to negate the ostensible condemnation.

We have all heard about the oppression of Muslims and root causes. It would be no surprise if the perpetrators of terrorist acts were actually the victims of our aggression--but they are not. The new enlightened moderate Jihadis are doctors and engineers--those who enjoyed opportunities afforded them by the evil decadent societies of the Kuffars/Kaffirs.

In my humble opinion, we are headed for a clash of 21st century values versus those of the 7th and it all boils down to the Ferdinand and Isabella choice: Assimilate, emigrate or...

Anyone genuinely interested in learning about this phenomenon should read Karen Armstrong's book holy war.Economic reasons and sense of powerlessness has always driven people to violence.Man always justify violence either with religion or for bringing democracy or finding WMD.In the last century when religion has been on decline wars have not declined infact became more lethal which proves authors point of view very well.One mistake though Prophet Mohammad was in 7th century not 14th.Comments from Mr.Frank Collins in this section proves intolerance is prevalent everywhere.

The mullahs also believe, and teach, that ALL knowledge is contained in the koran, that , therefore, it is impossible that any other knowledge can, nor, should, be added. Therefore, this entire blog is useless tripe. They, according to them, possess ALL knowledge. If the hypocrites would only adhere to their stated beliefs! This would mean that they refuse all western medicine, especially that developed by Jewish & Christian scientists. Then we wouldn't need to discuss them. By the way, there is ONE medical text written in Arabic: it is 70 years old. To paraphrase Marie Antoinette, let them stick to their OWN, Allah derived medicine, and, while they're at it, drink their own (Allah provided) oil. Why worry about which CENTURY they live in: why do they live at ALL! Since they worship death so much, WHO is stopping them?!

the history of the christian religion

Circa 33AD: Traditional date for Jesus Christ, Jewish religious leader, crucified. (C40AD?)

45-47AD: A famine strikes Judea. Christians in Antioch send relief to the church in Judea. THe procurator of Judea 46-48 is Tiberius Julius Alexander. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline.)

46-48AD: On the first Christian missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas travel through Cyprus (home island of Barnabas) and Asia Minor, (Acts 13-14), preaching in Salamis and Paphos, even teaching the new Roman proconsul. With them is cousin of Barnabas, John Mark. Paul preaches in the synagogue in Antioch of Pisidia, but conflict arose over his teaching. But Paul and Barnabas begin teaching Gentiles and found a mixed Gentile-Jewish church. In 47AD, Paul and Barnabas establish mixed churches at Derbe in Lycaonia, Iconium, and Lystra. Paul heals a man in Lystra and the locals try to worship he and Barnabas as embodiments of Greek gods Hermes and Zeus. Later the people turn against Paul and try to stone him to death. in 48AD, Paul and Barnabas revisit the new churches to strengthen them before returning to Antioch. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline.)

49AD: Jerusalem: A conference is held of Apostles and other Christian leaders. Are non-Jewish Christians required to observe Jewish matters of Law. Leaders are Peter, John and James brother of Jesus, and they decide that Paul is correct in not requiring Gentiles to observe Jewish Law, while Peter is correct in preaching to Jews to keep their Law. The same arguments surface later in Antioch, but Paul now disagrees with position of Peter, Barnabas and other Jewish Christians. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline.)

49-52AD: Paul and Silas (Silvanus), travel Asia Minor and Greece establishing churches (The Second Missionary Journey). (Acts 15:40-18:21) Timothy from Lystra joins Paul and becomes a close associate. Paul and Silas preach in Phrygia and Galatia in Central Asia Minor, establishing Gentile churches. Paul in Galatia has an unknown ailment. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

50AD: A written collection of Jesus' teachings and shorter sayings is assembled (it is not said where, in Jerusalem?). This collection is later used by the writers of the Gospels. Paul and Silas move to Europe and to Philippi of Macedonia. A Jewish woman, a merchant in purple cloth, Lydia, is converted. Opposition to Paul grows, he and Silas are arrested, beaten, jailed, forced to depart the city. In Thessalonica and Beroae, Paul and Silas start more mixed churches and apposition again drives them from towns. Paul preaches in Athens but evidently has no success there. He once addresses Greek philosophers in the council known as The Areopagus. In 50-51AD, Paul and Silas are in Corinth for 18 months, converting a head of a synagogue and Gentiles. Paul lives and works with Aquila and Priscilla, Jewish Christians who have moved from Rome. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline.)

51AD: Paul writes 1 Thessalonians and possibly 2 Thessalonians, the earliest writings of The New Testament. Paul is brought to trial by Jews before Gallio, governor of the area. But Gallio refuses to hear the case. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline.)

52-56AD: On Paul's Third Missionary Journey he works in Ephesus and travels through Macedonia and Greece. He visits churches in Galatia and returns to Ephesus. Between 52-55AD he works with Ephesus, and sends other missionaries to surrounding cities. In 52AD writes a now-lost letter to Corinthians. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline.)

52AD: Paul travels with Aquila and Priscilla to Ephesus. Paul leaves them and journeys to Palestine, then to Antioch. Apollos of Alexandria a follower of John the Baptist, arrives in Ephesus and is taught by Priscilla and Aquila. Apollos becomes an eloquent Christian preacher and goes to Corinth. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

53AD: Herod Agrippa II, son of Agrippa I, is granted rule of northeastern Palestine by Claudius in Rome. Paul writes his letter Galations to the church he founded in Galatia. He has enemies, those who have told the Galations they must keep the Jewish Laws. The church in Corinth asks Paul about marriage relationships, food from pagan sacrifices, manifestations of the Holy Spirit, etc. In 54AD, Paul writes Corinthians I which is delivered by his assistant, Titus. In 54-55AD, Paul finds that new Christian teachers have come to Corinth criticizing his message. Paul writers 2 Corinthians. In 54AD, Paul is evidently imprisoned in Ephesus; he writes his letter to Philippian church. In 55AD, Ephesians devoted to goddess Artemis protest against Paul and he travels north to Macedonia. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline.)

55-56AD: Paul winters in Corinth and writes a letter to church in Rome explaining his teachers and asking for their help when he travels to Spain. In 56AD he travels to Macedonia and Asia Minor then to Jerusalem, with money he has collected for the poor in the church at Jerusalem. But crowds in the Temple threaten Paul, he is arrested by Roman soldiers and Jerusalem authorities bring charges of sacrilege against him. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

50aAD and after 62AD after the martyrdom of James, Writing of Gospel of Thomas. (Date from Crossman, p. 427)

55-56AD: Writing of Writing of Letter of Paul to the Romans. (Date from Crossman, p. 427)

Winter 53-54AD: Writing of First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians. (Date from Crossman, p. 427)

Winter 52-53AD Writing of Letter of Paul to the Galatians (Date from Crossman, p. 427)

Late 50AD: Writing of First Letter of Paul to the Thessalonians. (Date from Crossman, p. 427)

57AD: A plot is discovered against life of Paul so Romans transfer him to Caesarea, where he is examined by procurator Felix, who makes no decision. In 57-59AD, Paul is in prison in Caesarea, till Felix is replaced by Festus. In 59-62AD, procurator of Judea is Porcius Festus. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

59AD: Procurator of Judea Festus suggests Paul be returned to Jerusalem, but Paul appears to Caesar, that he be sent to Rome for trial. Paul is given an audience before Festus, Agrippa II and his sister Bernice. Paul is sent with military guard on ship to Rome which breaks up on the island of Malta, but all survive. In 59-60AD, Paul winters on Malta and arrives in Rome in early spring. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline

60-62AD: Paul in Rome is under house arrest, and writes letters to Colossians, a lost letter to the Laodiceans, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians. It is thought that perhaps Paul was beheaded in Rome by Nero in 62AD, and later, perhaps after the fire of 54AD. Others suggest Paul was released and went not to Spain as he had planned, but back to Asia Minor and Crete. Some feel Paul was imprisoned twice from 62AD to 68AD. The Pastoral Letters 1 and Timothy 2 and Titus would date from this period. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

62AD: Killing of James the Just at the Temple, Jerusalem.

63-64AD: Rome: Apostle Peter in Rome asks Silvanus to compose a letter in his name to Christians in Asia Minor. Tradition has it that Peter is crucified upside down during the persecutions by Nero. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

64AD: Rome: A great fire burns for nine days from 18 July. Nero blames the Christians and begins to cruelly persecute them. "the first official condemnation of Christianity by the Roman government". (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline) The first Roman persecution of Christians begins about now.

75AD: Likely date for writing of The Letter to the Hebrews. Author is unknown but might have been Apollos, Priscilla, Barnabas or Luke. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

85AD: The Gospel of Matthew is written.

85-90AD: The Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles are written.

90-95AD: The Gospel of John is completed.

95AD: Gospel writer John is exiled on island of Patmos. He records apocalyptic visions and sends them to seven Christian churches in western Asia Mintore. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

95AD: The guide to Christian church order called "Teaching" or Didache, is written about now. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

Early90sAD: Date for writing of Gospel of Luke.

Late 90sAD: Date for writing of Epistle of Barnabas.

100AD: The Christian Letters called 1, 2 and 3 John are written about now.

100AD: 1 Clement is written from the Christian Church at Rome to the Church at Corinth.

100AD: The Gospel of Thomas is written in Greek. It is now known only in its Coptic translation.

100AD - early C2nd: Writing of Gospel of John.

100AD approx: Date for Writing of Revelation/Apocalypse of St John. (Date from Crossman, p. 431)

107AD: Ignatius as Bishop of Antioch is arrested and sent to Rome to die in arena. While travelling in Asia Minor he writes to Christians at six churches, Ephesus, Magnesia, Tralles, Philadelphia, Smyrna and Rome. Also to Polycarp, the Bishop of Smyrna. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

110AD: Writing of Letter of Ignatius, Bishop of Syrian Antioch as he is taken to Rome to martyrdom.

115AD: New religion, Christianity, spreads quickly in Eastern Syria and in Northern Mesopotamia. (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline) Rome copes with a Jewish rebellion in Cyrene.

100-115AD: Some scholars feel that the (Christian) Pastoral Letters are possibly composed in this period by a follower of Paul (of Tarsus). (Item from Thomas Robinson, The Bible Timeline)

THERE IS MORE BUT NOT ONE ARMY OR WAR IN THEIR FIRST 300 YEARS.

the christian religion has never been the cause of mass murder. if anyone did acts in violation of the commands of jesus, then they are not christians. hitler was not a christian, he was an animal that had to be put down, as well as all of his minions and other nazi's.
all people have engaged in war, that is not a problem, its human.
jews initially engaged in war to win a homeland - around 2,000 bc, or so. abraham was about 2500 bc. but they did not impose their religion on anyone else, they were strict in imposing it on themselves. that was all internal. and the old testament documents this.
jesus did not attack anyone, did not kill anyone, and for more than 300 years after his death the christian religion spread without one soldier, army, or battle.
but islam, islam is different. islam has been told by their fool of a good, that murder was the way to spread itself and commanded its followers to do that. and to make sure that his followers understood that moho the child rapist went at the head of an islamic army - killing all who opposed him. and he did it all under the command of his god, who many suspect was just a fiction into whose mouth moho put his personal words.
the followers of that vile terrorist organization then set about spreading islam as moho the rapist had done, with the sword. want me to post the history of how islam spread. no one just accepted it, unless there was an army at the gates. funny that the god of islam is the name of moho's daddy and the place of islam and those stupid stones, are the one that had been in his family for years. moho the rapist made himself the center of the universe by pretending to be the mouth piece of a fake god who did not know what the trinity was and had no understanding at all of the old or new testament. can you imagine a god - an all knowing god - that gets that wrong? it was wrong because moho just made it up and faked everything.

BASHIR THE LYING ISLAMIC:
what history recorded millions killed in the spanish inquisition. the figures go from 4,000 to as high as 30,000 but only a lying islamic would say millions.
but the evil of the spanish inquisition and those other things you noted were done in VIOLATION OF THE LAWS ESTABLISHED BY JESUS - LOVE THE LORD THY GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART AND LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF!
yes there were others, but none of them said kill anyone. the koran, the book of death - it is full of commands of your god to murder - not recording events of the past - but demanding conduct in the future.

as for those islamics that pretend to disagree with those who do follow the koran and commit vile acts on others, i have already posted the islamic verses where lying for islam is allowed. so no i dont believe an islamic that says he rejects those who actually follow the koran. i do not believe them and no one should.

RE:Regrettably, all three of the "great" monotheistic religions of the Middle East are exclusionary with respect to their ideas of "truth." (Note the Pope's most recent statement about the flawed and inferior nature of Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism.) Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have all been guilty of mass murder at various times in their histories, and homicidal megalomaniacs all all three persuasions have always been able to find justification for their teachings and actions in scripture. The fact is that religious zealotry of whatever stripe is the enemy of civilization, and the most dangerous words in any language are: "Ours is the one true faith."

WHAT A JOKE, WHAT ABOUT THE ATHIESTS (HITLER, STALLIN, AND ALL THE OTHER COMMUNISTS. . . . . OH YA, HOW ABOUT YOU LIBRIALS (GODLESS) WHO ARE KILLING BABIES IN THE WOMB BY THE THOUSANDS EVERYDAY, AND OF COURSE THE ELDERLY AND THE SICK COULD BE ADDED TO YOUR PLATTER. WHAT A JOKE YOU ALL ARE TO THINK THAT THESE RELIGIONS ARE THE SAME, EVEN WHEN THEY CLAIM TO BELIEVE IN ONLY ONE GOD!!! MAYBE YOU SHOULD STUDY THE CLAIMS OF THE LEADERS OF THESE FAITHS TO SEE IF THEY IN WORD OR DEED APPROVE OF THEIR FOLLOWERS TO TAKE LIFE IN STEAD OF LEADING THEM TO THE TRUTH (WHICH OF COURSE ANY OF YOU DON’T BELIEVE IN ANYWAY).
SEEK THE TRUTH AND DON’T STICK YOUR HEADS IN THE SAND AND IGNORE THAT THE MUSLEMS ARE THE ONES STRAPPING BOMBS AROUND THEIR CHILDREN’S WAIST TO DESTROY INNOCENT PEOPLE AND TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT THEY WANT. THEY WANT WORLD DOMANATION AND HAVE TRIED FOR CENTURIES. ALTHOUGH LIBERIALS CAN’T SEEM TO SEE IT BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE SAME FATHER THAT BLINDS THEM SEEING THE TRUTH.

SEEK THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Frank,
what kind of an idiot are you:Muslims keep telling U they are not islamics-there is no such term-why do u insist? A sign of an empty head,I guess.

I deeply regret my usual slander of and hatered for Islam and Muslims-especially my cut and past abuse. Am really ashamed of myself and solmenly swear that from now on my loyalty will be to the great USA and not to AIPAC and israel.

"It is unfortunate that God cannot speak for himself to expose those conmen who slaughter innocent creatures in his name. I wish he could."

If your god cannot do this, what good is he?

Answer: none -- because he doesn't exist.

And the sooner people start taking responsibility for their actions the sooner we'll be done with all this non-sense.

Oftentimes when I see arguments like this I think of a newer Communist leader speaking of a failed, older Communist leader: "The problem is not with Communism, it was with the 'previous' implementation or interpretation".

How many times have you heard the following?

"The problem is not with Islam (or Christianity, whatever), it is with this person's or this other person's interpretation of it."

Me? One too many.

Though I condemn those attacking innocent civilians in the strongest terms.Though I am totally against answering violence with violence, in other wards the law of an eye for an eye. I am also against reasonable people who at times resorting to criminal acts such targeting unarmed non combatants, while fighting for just causes. But in the same token, I can not loose sight of the brutality of the colonial wars triggered by the atrocities and arrogance of the western colonial powers. Colonial wars as you know are messy enterprises, where heavily armed slow western armies fight lightly armed but versatile and highly agile nationalist and liberation armies. The failure and frustration of these colonial armies against nationalist forces, often leads them to despicable atrocities and torture against civilian populations. We can not overlook the French atrocities in Algeria, Vietnam and elsewhere. We can not put our heads in the and ignore the unconventional tactics used by the colonial armies in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, and else where. We all know what had happened in Abu Qarib prison in Iraq. The illegal tactics and also the very presence of those armies in foreign lands must also be condemned. All kinds of terrorism against civilians must be stopped and chastised. If atrocities were perpetrated by insurgents or states makes no difference.The only way to stop the mayhem is total withdrawn from these lands they are occupying now. Again I will vehemently condemn those using brutality in the name of Islam or any religion.They are wrong and in violation of all the tenant Islam, Christianity, Judaism, secular humanism and the 1949 Geneva convention. All brutality against innocent people must be stopped.Colonial powers must know the time they can do what ever they want in foreign lands is long gone. The sun has set from the now defunct British empire long time ago. Lets us all work together for world peace as equal people. Let us resolve our conflict through peaceful means. Let freedom ring every where in the world.

" I can understand people rejecting change and determined to continue to live as the Prophet lived in the 14th century."

I believe that Mr. Goth meant that WE are living in the 14th century. That is correct if your calendar was reset by the events of Mohammed's life, rather than by those of Christ's.

Thank you for your ereudite, truthful, honest, self-examining, and enlightened post.

If only the Talib and their supporters could READ...

Muslims who support the truths you illuminate in your post need to stand up now and voice their support loudly in their local Islamic center. In the press, and in the street voices such as your's must be heard until those who would twist Islam from a message of peace into a deathwish are drowned out by the rest of muslim society wishing peace and tranquility here on earth.

The Prophet did not live in the 14th century as you have mentioned in the beginning of your article -- it was the 6th century.

"Islam liberated man from the worship of rocks and sculptures" Poorly stated and deliberately insulting, this and other statements are testament to the self-righteous hypocrisy of such writers.

I would suggest the author go and meet with people who have these alternate forms of worship - he will find unique symbols of the almighty in every speck of dust as well as the grandest of sculptures. Why do not people of his ilk become more accepting of the beauty of diversity and the uniqueness of all religions and not just the ones they profess to faithfully follow or espouse.

From his article, it is clear that Mr. Goth is a proud muslim. Therin lies the problem, every religious person thinks his/her own religion is the correct religion. And Mr. Goth writes this article for the sole purpose of defending his faith. Unfortunately, at the moment we do not know if God exists or not. If one day through scientific research, we find God is a mere product of human imagination, a subset of cortical neurons firing during intense stress or depression, than indeed, men die for men and for God.

Regrettably, all three of the "great" monotheistic religions of the Middle East are exclusionary with respect to their ideas of "truth." (Note the Pope's most recent statement about the flawed and inferior nature of Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism.) Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have all been guilty of mass murder at various times in their histories, and homicidal megalomaniacs all all three persuasions have always been able to find justification for their teachings and actions in scripture. The fact is that religious zealotry of whatever stripe is the enemy of civilization, and the most dangerous words in any language are: "Ours is the one true faith."

Maybe some Christians murder in the name of Jesus.

But that number pales in comparison to the number who murder in the name of allah.

Idiots.

Well said RICK (above). Good article, but that statement (Islam liberated man from the worship of rocks and sculptures) exposes the author's small-mindedness.

Everyone responding negatively to this terrific article seems to have forgotten one key element of the article....it rejects the violence of radical islam. For all you nit pickers out there...think about that for a second. IT's powerful. A truly visible, published article which rejects the suicide bombings on religous grounds from a Muslim? I say more power to him! There's far too little vocal condemnation of this type of act.

Frank, give it a rest, you're making a fool of yourself with each posting. Go back to the history books if you think that Christians are not capable of murder for their beliefs. It's happening even today.

"Islam liberated man from the worship of rocks and sculptures"

That sounds like a pretty smug statement to me Mr Goth. When the Taliban were blowing up the the Buddhas in Afghanistan, they probably had the same idea as you have conveyed here. Just by building grand sculptures and bowing down to images doesn't mean people don't get the idea of a higher God. In the same tone, just by bowing down in a certain direction doesn't give them a more enlightened understanding.

Your statement reminds me of what Thomas Friedman has been saying all along, and what has been a personal experience of mine too. No matter how well read or educated a Muslim person I have come across, when it comes to religion...they simply believe that their God is 1.0, Christian God is 2.0, Jewish God is 3.0 and Buddhism/Hinduism etc are not even worth considering. I just feel that that is somehow not rational and is a result of how religion is taught to them as kids. I guess all Judeo-Christian religions suffer through this syndrome more or less but I have noticed that its much more pronounced in Islam.

Your above statement, is a perfect example.

Mr.Bashir,
Thanks for your article. I agree with it fully. Maybe next time you can write an article that explains how people love to bash our Prophet and our religion even though their religion says turn the other cheek? As muslems, we do not make fun or badger other religions because of our faith and because of the Sura that specifically tells us that " they have their religion, and you have Yours". And we are especially not allowed to make fun of Christians and Jews because they are people of the book. But why, do they badger us and our Prophet may God rest his soul. I understand fully the criticism of a terrorists radical view of our religion as we muslems also critizise the narrow, violent view that they espouse, but how, do you disrespect anybody's prophet or God?
Frank Collins> the lies that come out of your "opinions" are so big they make me and my muslem family laugh. Every verse you quote out of the Quran you have changed. Way to go . You are the biggest liar on W.Post. You and Bush and Cheney should go to dinner together.

Posted on July 16, 2007 12:52

pete murray:
I understand that the Chistian Gospels say that you should not lie or kill. So, what distorted ideology prompted the untruths and distortons about WMD and their use as a pretext for raining mass death on Iraqi men women and children during Operation Desert Storm?

--

Answer: Spreading the Gospel was not the justification for the war in Iraq.

I don't see why worshipping "rocks and sculptures" needs any liberation from. It is preposterous to think that people who were worshipping idols(before the advent of Islam) were not thinking or were not into any scientific activity. In claiming so, the writer seems to suggest that Islam is somehow better than other religions that existed at that time. It is this feeling that plants the seeds of intolerance.

true.. facts of islam and muslims during the life of God' messenger (pbup) have distorted. i do blame the corrupt government of the middle east and north africa for this choas in the muslim word.. i do hope if there is anything postive that come out of this situation would be the fall of those regimes.

"Hard as it may seem, I can understand people rejecting change and determined to continue to live as the Prophet lived in the 14th century."

Another lazy journalist.

Can we get back to the really important questions like whether saying the Catholic Mass in Latin is a violation of an atheist's rights?

Christ, Moses, Budda and almost all other notable religious personages advocated peace and pacifism.
Mohammad robbed caravans.

What should bring us together in gratitude, our common love of God, drives us apart with mythology. Christians must have a superhero who died and returned (see Joseph Campbell). Muslims must have a superhero who flew to heaven and back. Jews have a prophet (Moses, Musa) who hosted God in his tent in the desert and who gave Moses and Joshua permission to wipe out entire kingdoms to steal their land.

When we are ready to have peace we must do the hard work of casting aside the mythology and returning to the core omnitheism. Then we will have peace.

The "prophet" was also an illiterate, a pedophile, and, a mass murderer: he killed all Saudi Jews. Bottom line: maybe his "followers" might re-think that 72-virgin thing.

saddam is said to be responsible for the murder of more than one million islamics. in addition he is respopnsible for killing 5,000 a month following the first gulf war, when he lost, not counting the military actions in the south.
and in iraq, islamics are responsible for more deaths than americas.

no christian ever murdered for christ - as murder violates the laws of jesus. murder is demanded of islamics.

and when the world was fighting the nazi scum who was on the side of the nazis?

answer: http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/

and in ww1 - yes we have more islamic murder.
In the early stages of World War I, in 1915 Russian armies advanced on Turkey from the north and the British attempted an invasion from the Mediterranean. Citing the threat of internal rebellion from christians, the islamic Ottoman government ordered large-scale roundups, deportations, and systematic torture and murder of christian Armenians beginning in the spring of 1915. Estimates vary from 600,000 to 2 million christian deaths out of the prewar population of about 3 million Armenians. By 1917 fewer than 200,000 christian Armenians remained in islamic Turkey.

Mr. Goth has it exactly right. Religions don't kill people, people with religion kill people.

So.......who has killed more people, including women and children in Iraq? the "evil" Jihadists? Or the "Holier than thou" Christians? Or isn't god counting?

This was a good article. Thanks Bashir

i like islamics and many use that term and i shall too.
and 14th century? moho the child rapist wsa dead in 632 ad - that is not the 14th century you idiot. that is the 7th century.

I'm worried for Bashir Goth. Some mullah somewhere is sure to order a Fahtwah on his head.

Frank:

The proper term for believers in Islam is "Muslims," not "islamics"
(least of all--as I have on occasion heard--"Islams!") "Muslim" and "islamic" are proper alternative adjectival forms.

"JRLR:
A. Musa, Connecticut, USA writes: "Martyrdom is Unique to Islam ..."

"That is false.For centuries, catholics too have had their martyrs and in large number."

JRLR;
As I corrected myself Martyrdom is not Unique to Islam. You are right on your point.
I will go one step further, Savagery, ruthlessness, and wiping out whole nations from the face of the earth(Red Indians) or droping Hydrogen bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki is not unique to Muslims.
One have to read about the hundred Years war of Europe where Europeans were slaughtering each other in the name of religion.
One have to read, or watch on TV the slaughter of Palestinians daily in thier home lands for over fifty years.
One Have to read about the suffering and the persecution of the Jews for centuries in all the parts of the world.
Tibetian monks burning themselves in public places is another prove that no matter what name one's religion is called there were, are , and will be radical, fanatic, and ruthless indiviuals or groups who believe, advocate and implement martyrdom.
What is frightening and no one can prepare for is when one does not want to go by himsef/herself but when one decides and does take a lot of other people with him/her. Sadly, many of these fanatics are taking a lot of innocent women, children, and elderly with them.

Didn't the prophet live in the 6th-7th Centuries and not the 14th Century?

Otherwise I agree with the writer in many respects

'I am unaware of any occasion or record in which the Prohpet or even the holy Quran santioned people to kill innocent children,women and non-combatant civilians in their homes'
No,not correct.

Poetess Asma(woman) had been stabbed on her bed,so 'traitor' can be slain in everywhere.
Three other poets also murdered by Prophet's men.
Qurayza tribe;at least 800 men slaughtered by muslims commended by Prophet.

the difference between catholics - they are killed refusing to say that they no longer keep the faith. islam allows islamics to deny their faith, and makes them martyrs when the kill themselves.

A. Musa, Connecticut, USA writes: "Martyrdom is Unique to Islam ..."

That is false.

For centuries, catholics too have had their martyrs and in large number. Catholics designate some of those illustrious dead as "saint and martyr".

The catholic martyrologue is that book where is to be found the name of each and every martyr that is commemorated, day after day, in a given year.

As disciples of Christ, cardinals in the catholic church wear red, symbolizing the blood of martyrs.

all islamics are terrorists if they are really islamics. if they are islamics in name only they may not be terrorists, but if they are really islamics that is what they are.

"Martyrdom is Unique to Islam and the criminal elements from Islamic countries or from Somalia do not represent me, Bashir Goth, or any other decent person from our country or religion."
Sorry I intend to write"
Martyrdom is not Unique to Islam and the criminal elements from Islamic countries or from Somalia do not represent me, Bashir Goth, or any other decent person from our country or religion."

"Hard as it may seem, I can understand people rejecting change and determined to continue to live as the Prophet lived in the 14th century. But what I cannot understand is how they are able to twist the words and actions of the Prophet, in whom they so vehemently believe, and commit such inhuman crimes in his name."

Bashir Goth, hit the nail at head again, as he kept doing here and in his writings in other places.
I and Bashir Goth are both from Somalia and we are both from religous families.
Nothing in our up bringing and our religious background condones, acqieces, or is silent about the ruthless killing, maiming or displacing innocent non combatent person's let alone women, children and the elderly.
Randomly and indiscriminately killing innocent civilians from any ethnic, religous, gender, or class background is not in my Islamic teaching or Somali up bringing.
As far as I know, I was taught in early age to be exact grade three this Hadith." Al Muslim man Salima Insaano min yadihi wa lisaanihi" In English a muslim is one people are saved from his hand or deeds and words.
We are not allowed to bad mouth people not alone kill them, harm them, miam them and displace them.
One may ask if that is what Islam teaches why we have all the problems from Islamic radicals?
Fair question, but Muslims did not produce Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, the Shamir's, Sharon's and the likes.
NO matter what religion one is willing to die for or kill for, it is not in the name of God, Allah, Bagwaan, Dio, or whatever name one gives his/her creator.
Every religion has ruthless, grazy, criminal elements.
Martyrdom is Unique to Islam and the criminal elements from Islamic countries or from Somalia do not represent me, Bashir Goth, or any other decent person from our country or religion.

"Men Die for Other Men, Not for God".

Well, let me stir the pot for a minute!

Notwithstanding my own preferences, I think this statement is false and dangerously misleading.

That statement can only come from a non-religious person, someone with an exclusively secular viewpoint. I believe it presupposes, wrongly, that only a non-religious viewpoint is right, rational, etc.

There are in this world: 1. deeply religious people, 2. people with a predominantly religious outlook on life and on the world.

There is also in this world, still, what is called "freedom of religion".

It is my opinion that people with a religious outlook on life and on the world will die not for other people first, but for GOD, i.e. for what they value the highest, be it personified or not. That is God, personal or impersonal.

I would go even further and state that even non-religious people generally die for GOD, not for other people.

I was impressed hearing young people state, recently: "First, I am a religious man, a man of this nationality second, and "John Smith" third.

With all due respect to Nietzsche (and to Bashir Goth...): God is not dead but very much alive; and as we all know, God being omnipotent, God cannot just be bombed into oblivion.

the bible does not preclude mistakes of fact, only intentional lies. but your koran even commands you to lie.
desert storm? that was in 91 when saddam stole another country and we made him give it back.
and to murder and hate you follow the koran, you break the rules of christ to if you murder and hate.
and not finding is not the same as not having.
but to lying islam:

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."

Demons and dogmas -- good summation of the problem by this writer.

It takes some special features in social development to contain the demons to souls in personal agony, and to build civilized firewalls to block the potentially expansive damage of dogmas.

I wonder what is missing in the institutional construction of societies which are so obviously in continuous deadly anguish over their religion. What I am saying is, yes, it is a religious problem, but also it is a political one as well. How does a society get healthy when it has such a sickness? Some balance between religion and politics it would appear; definitely not one completely dominating the other.

I understand that the Chistian Gospels say that you should not lie or kill. So, what distorted ideology prompted the untruths and distortons about WMD and their use as a pretext for raining mass death on Iraqi men women and children during Operation Desert Storm?

And while we are at it, doesn't the Jewish religion say that "Thou shalt not steal"? Tell that to the fanatical Israeli settlers who believe that "God told them" they could steal the homes farms water and private property of non-Jews?

It seems strange that God seems only to speak directly to the killers and robbers!

This is a terrific article due to the author's insights and perspectives. Best regards and thank you Mr. Goth.

here is what islam demands from its followers. how do you get more radical then these words of terror and hate and murder?
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."

Another aspect of these radical preachers; very few of them ever actually martyr themselves. Those who recruit suicide bombers do not become bombers themselves, or allow their sons to become bombers. In that way they are really no different from the chickenhawks in the White House. George Orwell might have been writing about today's sheiks (or presidents) when he wrote in Homage to Catalonia several decades ago:

"It is the same in all wars; the soldiers do the fighting, the journalists do the shouting, and no true patriot ever gets near a front-line trench, except on the briefest of propaganda-tours. Sometimes it is a comfort to me to think that the aeroplane is altering the conditions of war. Perhaps when the next great war comes we may see that sight unprecedented in all history, a jingo with a bullet-hole in him."