We cannot afford to maintain these ancient prejudices against Islam

Karen Armstrong

In the 12th century, Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Cluny, initiated a dialogue with the Islamic world. “I approach you not with arms, but with words,” he wrote to the Muslims whom he imagined reading his book, “not with force, but with reason, not with hatred, but with love.” Yet his treatise was entitled Summary of the Whole Heresy of the Diabolical Sect of the Saracens and segued repeatedly into spluttering intransigence. Words failed Peter when he contemplated the “bestial cruelty” of Islam, which, he claimed, had established itself by the sword. Was Muhammad a true prophet? “I shall be worse than a donkey if I agree,” he expostulated, “worse than cattle if I assent!”

Peter was writing at the time of the Crusades. Even when Christians were trying to be fair, their entrenched loathing of Islam made it impossible for them to approach it objectively. For Peter, Islam was so self-evidently evil that it did not seem to occur to him that the Muslims he approached with such “love” might be offended by his remarks. This medieval cast of mind is still alive and well.

Last week, Pope Benedict XVI quoted, without qualification and with apparent approval, the words of the 14th-century Byzantine emperor Manuel II: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” The Vatican seemed bemused by the Muslim outrage occasioned by the Pope’s words, claiming that the Holy Father had simply intended “to cultivate an attitude of respect and dialogue toward the other religions and cultures, and obviously also towards Islam”.

But the Pope’s good intentions seem far from obvious. Hatred of Islam is so ubiquitous and so deeply rooted in western culture that it brings together people who are usually at daggers drawn. Neither the Danish cartoonists, who published the offensive caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad last February, nor the Christian fundamentalists who have called him a paedophile and a terrorist, would ordinarily make common cause with the Pope; yet on the subject of Islam they are in full agreement.

Our Islamophobia dates back to the time of the Crusades, and is entwined with our chronic antisemitism. Some of the first Crusaders began their journey to the Holy Land by massacring the Jewish communities along the Rhine valley; the Crusaders ended their campaign in 1099 by slaughtering some 30,000 Muslims and Jews in Jerusalem. It is always difficult to forgive people we know we have wronged. Thenceforth Jews and Muslims became the shadow-self of Christendom, the mirror image of everything that we hoped we were not – or feared that we were.

The fearful fantasies created by Europeans at this time endured for centuries and reveal a buried anxiety about Christian identity and behaviour. When the popes called for a Crusade to the Holy Land, Christians often persecuted the local Jewish communities: why march 3,000 miles to Palestine to liberate the tomb of Christ, and leave unscathed the people who had – or so the Crusaders mistakenly assumed – actually killed Jesus. Jews were believed to kill little children and mix their blood with the leavened bread of Passover: this “blood libel” regularly inspired pogroms in Europe, and the image of the Jew as the child slayer laid bare an almost Oedipal terror of the parent faith.

Jesus had told his followers to love their enemies, not to exterminate them. It was when the Christians of Europe were fighting brutal holy wars against Muslims in the Middle East that Islam first became known in the west as the religion of the sword. At this time, when the popes were trying to impose celibacy on the reluctant clergy, Muhammad was portrayed by the scholar monks of Europe as a lecher, and Islam condemned – with ill-concealed envy – as a faith that encouraged Muslims to indulge their basest sexual instincts. At a time when European social order was deeply hierarchical, despite the egalitarian message of the gospel, Islam was condemned for giving too much respect to women and other menials.

In a state of unhealthy denial, Christians were projecting subterranean disquiet about their activities on to the victims of the Crusades, creating fantastic enemies in their own image and likeness. This habit has persisted. The Muslims who have objected so vociferously to the Pope’s denigration of Islam have accused him of “hypocrisy”, pointing out that the Catholic church is ill-placed to condemn violent jihad when it has itself been guilty of unholy violence in crusades, persecutions and inquisitions and, under Pope Pius XII, tacitly condoned the Nazi Holocaust.

Pope Benedict delivered his controversial speech in Germany the day after the fifth anniversary of September 11. It is difficult to believe that his reference to an inherently violent strain in Islam was entirely accidental. He has, most unfortunately, withdrawn from the interfaith initiatives inaugurated by his predecessor, John Paul II, at a time when they are more desperately needed than ever. Coming on the heels of the Danish cartoon crisis, his remarks were extremely dangerous. They will convince more Muslims that the west is incurably Islamophobic and engaged in a new crusade.

We simply cannot afford this type of bigotry. The trouble is that too many people in the western world unconsciously share this prejudice, convinced that Islam and the Qur’an are addicted to violence. The 9/11 terrorists, who in fact violated essential Islamic principles, have confirmed this deep-rooted western perception and are seen as typical Muslims instead of the deviants they really were.

With disturbing regularity, this medieval conviction surfaces every time there is trouble in the Middle East. Yet until the 20th century, Islam was a far more tolerant and peaceful faith than Christianity. The Qur’an strictly forbids any coercion in religion and regards all rightly guided religion as coming from God; and despite the western belief to the contrary, Muslims did not impose their faith by the sword.

The early conquests in Persia and Byzantium after the Prophet’s death were inspired by political rather than religious aspirations. Until the middle of the eighth century, Jews and Christians in the Muslim empire were actively discouraged from conversion to Islam, as, according to Qur’anic teaching, they had received authentic revelations of their own. The extremism and intolerance that have surfaced in the Muslim world in our own day are a response to intractable political problems – oil, Palestine, the occupation of Muslim lands, the prevalence of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, and the west’s perceived “double standards” – and not to an ingrained religious imperative.

But the old myth of Islam as a chronically violent faith persists, and surfaces at the most inappropriate moments. As one of the received ideas of the west, it seems well-nigh impossible to eradicate. Indeed, we may even be strengthening it by falling back into our old habits of projection. As we see the violence – in Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon – for which we bear a measure of responsibility, there is a temptation, perhaps, to blame it all on “Islam”. But if we are feeding our prejudice in this way, we do so at our peril. bismika-tombstone We cannot afford to maintain these ancient prejudices against Islam

30 Comments

  1. Hei Gou or black dog is an SOB, thats why he chooses the name Hei Gou inspired by his mother. This son of a dog doesn’t care about the truth and even would support genocide to state his point, thats not scoring, its called islamaphobe seizure. I agree with Xman lets play hardball with this bastard.

  2. phew – this Heigou is full of hate & steam.
    Dav – The Bible has been changed so many times by so many people that one doesnt know which part is from God & which part is from men. Jesus pbuh only brought 1 Gospel and taught it in Aramaic. 300 years later Emperor Constantine chose 4 different gospels for us from thousands of others. These 4 are all in greek language. No gospel exists in Jesus own language of Aramaic. You are already lost.
    God sent Quran to help you. Read it.

  3. Xman may God give you wisdom to know what is good what is bad. Let’s not side tracked from the topic. Hope you can reason out the Bible and Quran and know the truth. If someone else hates Islam it doesn’t mean Islam is the truth. What if someone else loves Islam does it mean Islam is false? Zionism, extreamism, pacifism, whatever name there is can it be a yardstick to measure the amount of truth/lies?

  4. HeiGou is a ranting, raving, mad, Islam hating ZIONAZI.

    See my other posts about him:
    http://www.bismikaallahuma.org.....cal-roots/

    http://www.bismikaallahuma.org.....-for-rape/

    His methodology is to generalise and try not to make simple factual statements that can easily be refuted.

  5. :-) I know what I believe. I am a christian. For me I believe God spoke to the nation of Israel and reveaal his love for all manakind through Jesus Christ. I believe Satan would want to draw ppl away from Jesus in whatever way he can and ppl are the very instrument he uses. So ppl must think first if what they are saying is what God want them to say. Will the end result of what they sayt leads other ppl away from God and nearer to hell? God will rejoice if we love one another and love Jesus. That is the reason behind “Make God happy nd not the Satan”. I put my faith in Jesus. Sorry! Mohammad(PBUH) not in the list of ppl I would want to depend on for my salvation. Even Muslims are asked to pray for him. I certainly do not want to put my faith in him. I would rather pray for my love one and for my soul. :-)

  6. dav said on 25 November 2006:”The Quran share the same root of the Torah and New Testament and have said the Injil of the Christians and the Injil of the Quran are the same. However modern Muslim scholars have problem reconciling both of the Injil. How to justify that they are the same when the wordings and teachings are so different? Both can’t be right at the same time? One of the Injil has to be faulty. If the phrophet had said the Injil is the same but in the modern day found to be not and the Torah and New Testament seems to compliment each other then this must be the works of the Jews. They must have corrupted the Injil.”

    The Quran does not share the same roots as the Torah and the New Testament. Those two were produced in Palestine in a Jewish context. The Quran was revealed in Arabia – thousands of kilometers away in a very different cultural context. The “Injil” of the Quran does not exist today, nor is there any evidence of it ever having existed in the past. No reference to it. No trace of it in other works. Either it never existed or there has been a vast conspiracy for the last 2000 years to cover up what Jesus really said. You can blame the Jews if you like but there is a simpler explanation about what Muhammed said.

    dav said on 25 November 2006:”I would sincerely ask all to seek the truth. Importantly are we to please ourself, our traditional way of thinking/living, our spiritual/politically leaders? Or should our thinking and beliefs of faith be pleasing to the Almightty God. If what we say or do are leading to God then let rejoice together for we will be in the same heaven. If our deeds leads others astray and make Satan tremendously glad then u will have to answer to God after your life here on earth. Your spiritual/political leaders are not there to answer on your behalf. They too will have to give their accounts to God.”

    I would sincerely ask you to seek the truth too – which is more likely, Muhammed got it wrong, or there is some vast conspiracy to suppressed the truth stretching over 2000 years? Your question is begging the question in that it is designed to lead you to a particular answer. How about “are we to please ourselves, our traditional way of thinking, our spiritual leaders AND God?” See how you have excluded a world of possibilities? You assume that you know with any certainty what God or Satan want. Apart from the obviously biased texts of your religion, why do you have confidence that you know anything? Muhammed will intercede with God for Muslims on the Last Day. Why can’t other people?

    dav said on 25 November 2006:”I think friendship is a good thing. So if a scripture can give a command “Do not take a Jew or a Christian as a friend” Sura 5.51 lets think again. Jew n Christian are all over the world now regardles of race. Why the choise of word is so specific to ppl of these 2 faiths?”

    Aren’t you changing your religion to suit your values and not your values to suit your religion?

  7. Hi, I share Richard’s thoughts and way of approach to discuss religion. Unfortunately he has left. I believe we should go to the basic, the Holy text of both Bible n Quran. The Bible consists of Old n New Testaments. Old Testament have the books of Torah and all phrophets of Israel before Jesus Christ. The New Testament have the Gospel and recordings of his disciples. There are many ppl’s writting and interestingly there is a sustaining story line and of phrophecies. Then came 600 years later prophet Mohammad (PBUH) receive revelation from an angel asking him to recite the verses. Each time few sentences of verses were given over separated period of events. There were no recordings of his revelations during his life time. Only through word of mouth and memory. After the death of the prophet Mohammad (PBUH) did his follower begin to compile all his words.

    The Quran share the same root of the Torah and New Testament and have said the Injil of the Christians and the Injil of the Quran are the same. However modern Muslim scholars have problem reconciling both of the Injil. How to justify that they are the same when the wordings and teachings are so different? Both can’t be right at the same time? One of the Injil has to be faulty. If the phrophet had said the Injil is the same but in the modern day found to be not and the Torah and New Testament seems to compliment each other then this must be the works of the Jews. They must have corrupted the Injil.

    I would sincerely ask all to seek the truth. Importantly are we to please ourself, our traditional way of thinking/living, our spiritual/politically leaders? Or should our thinking and beliefs of faith be pleasing to the Almightty God. If what we say or do are leading to God then let rejoice together for we will be in the same heaven. If our deeds leads others astray and make Satan tremendously glad then u will have to answer to God after your life here on earth. Your spiritual/political leaders are not there to answer on your behalf. They too will have to give their accounts to God.

    I think friendship is a good thing. So if a scripture can give a command “Do not take a Jew or a Christian as a friend” Sura 5.51 lets think again. Jew n Christian are all over the world now regardles of race. Why the choise of word is so specific to ppl of these 2 faiths?

    Religion is a personal decision. It should be of free will and should not be punished. Is once a Muslim always Muslim concept still stands? If one is to apostate from Muslim faith then Sura 4.89 commands the person to be Hmmmm…..

    Can I exchange my property and life for heaven? No where in The Law(Torah) or the Bible(Gospel) is this mentioned. Are we to slay and be slain for what? Who’s cause? Not mentioned in The Law(Torah) and the Bible(Gospel). Very coincidental or willfully chosen date of the famous 9/11/2001 event ..Sura 9.111

    009.111
    YUSUFALI: Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur’an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.

    PICKTHAL: Lo! Allah hath bought from the believers their lives and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs: they shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain. It is a promise which is binding on Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. Who fulfilleth His covenant better than Allah? Rejoice then in your bargain that ye have made, for that is the supreme triumph.

    SHAKIR: Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah’s way, so they slay and are slain; a promise which is binding on Him in the Taurat and the Injeel and the Quran; and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Rejoice therefore in the pledge which you have made; and that is the mighty achievement.

  8. PaakMaw said on 2 November 2006:”Folks, kindly do not take HeiGou (translated as “Black Dog”) as seriously as he is long-winded, aimless and doesnt seem to be able to stick to any point in any discussion WHEREVER he goes on the Net.”

    And yet I notice an inability to deal with anything I have said much less disprove any of it.

    PaakMaw said on 2 November 2006:”For a quick example, his LAST sentence, “No one is being killed for their faith. Except non-Muslims” is merely trying to INSTIGATE and DISTRACT (I.D.).”

    Instigate what? Is it true? Well yes it is. What is the point of denying it? Distract? From what? This site contains a large number of self-pitying articles that miss the point – only kafirs are dying for their religion. It goes to the heart of the issue.

  9. Folks, kindly do not take HeiGou (translated as “Black Dog”) as seriously as he is long-winded, aimless and doesnt seem to be able to stick to any point in any discussion WHEREVER he goes on the Net.

    (refer to Nafees’ comment on HeiGou’s behaviour and *#%#@# words in other sites in “On revising bigotry”)

    For a quick example, his LAST sentence, “No one is being killed for their faith. Except non-Muslims” is merely trying to INSTIGATE and DISTRACT (I.D.).

    Do not even honour his intentions by giving a response to the LAST or any other sentence. Such statements reveal his true intentions (I.D.) in participating in these discussions.

    The Prophet, on the Israq Mi’raj, encountered voices calling out to him on both sides and rightfully ignored it, therein, a guide for us to do the same, to remain undistracted, in all our focus and efforts.

    Regards, PaakMaw (“White Cat”)

  10. Ahmad said on 17 October 2006:”HeiGou did not know a lot of things about Islam. He just pick and choose and conclude about Islam. Richard is right he is point scoring. He already had this preconcieved idea about Muslims are terrorist because Islam teach them to terrorise and kills the infidels.”

    You can trivially prove me wrong then. Where do I do any of this point scoring? It has been a long and slow process for me to realise that those Muslims who defend terrorism are probably not in the minority and actually have pretty good arguments. Certainly no one has ever been able to explain to me why Sheik Qaradawi is wrong when he support suicide bombing.

    Ahmad said on 17 October 2006:”He wanted to be recognized as a winner of a debate. If he choose to be recognized as such let him be.”

    Self-evidently on a Muslim-run site no kafir will ever “win” a debate even if we could agree what that meant.

    Ahmad said on 17 October 2006:”9/11 was an unfortunate incident not only the Americans, the non-muslim but to all the Muslims all over the world. This is a real test time by Allah to all of us. Only those with a strongth faith in Allah and Muhammad (saw) shall pass the test. Rasullallah (saw) had been tested worst than this for did all other Prophets of Allah and some them were killed, just because they called all human beings to have a faith in Allah.”

    Somehow I think it was a little more unfortunate for non-Muslims than for Muslims. But of course some people only care about their own and not humanity at large.

    No one is being killed for their faith. Except non-Muslims.

  11. To me HeiGou did not know a lot of things about Islam. He just pick and choose and conclude about Islam. Richard is right he is point scoring. He already had this preconcieved idea about Muslims are terrorist because Islam teach them to terrorise and kills the infidels.

    He wanted to be recognized as a winner of a debate. If he choose to be recognized as such let him be. This is type of person written in the The Holy ALQURAN:

    AlBaqarah 10:
    In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: and grievous is the penalty they (incur), because they are false (to themselves).
    AlBaqarah 11
    When it is said to them: “Make not mischief on the earth,” they say: “Why, we only want to make peace!”
    AlBaqarah 12
    Of a surety, they are the ones who make mischief, but they realise (it) not.
    AlBaqarah 13
    When it is said to them: “Believe as the others believe,” they say: “Shall we believe as the fools believe?” Nay, of a surety they are the fools, but they do not know.

    And many more verses that described the non believers of this type.

    In my opinion from all his comments, I can read that he is actually seeking the truth but he just could find as yet as Allah has not given him hidayat (light), just as yet. I am sure if he keep searching one of these days he shall find.

    This HeiGou guy is found everywhere in the web, especially Islamic related forums and blogs. He comments are all the same and it could be the same guy or girl.

    Not to worry so much as we Muslims our mission is to inform and Allah The Almighty that change a person.

    AlBaqarah 272
    It is not required of thee (O Messenger), to set them on the right path, but Allah sets on the right path whom He pleaseth. Whatever of good ye give benefits your own souls, and ye shall only do so seeking the “Face” of Allah. Whatever good ye give, shall be rendered back to you, and ye shall not be dealt with unjustly.

    We have made clear none of our Islamic teaching that tought us to be voilence or conduct any of the terrorist act. We shall see many of these type againts Islam not because they are not clever but they are influenced so much by the vengeance feeling especially of 9/11 incident.

    9/11 was an unfortunate incident not only the Americans, the non-muslim but to all the Muslims all over the world. This is a real test time by Allah to all of us. Only those with a strongth faith in Allah and Muhammad (saw) shall pass the test. Rasullallah (saw) had been tested worst than this for did all other Prophets of Allah and some them were killed, just because they called all human beings to have a faith in Allah.

    Allah knows best.

  12. P.S. I know I said goodbye, but my wife has insisted that I should add a thought from her, which I believe is well worth your understanding.

    If any religion authorizes, through the mouth of its prophets, priests, interpreters, jurists, or even the voice of ‘God’ him/her/itself, any action, emotion or thought that is physically or mentally violent to another human being, then that religion is to be rejected as perverted. In English ‘God’ is derived from ‘good’. We all (and this includes YOU) know this at the most fundamental level.

    So thats it.

    There’s no more.

  13. Well, I assume from the continuing tone of this debate that nobody is particularly interested in anything except point scoring. So let me by way of farewell do a little of that too.

    Yes HeiGou I can tell from your posts that you are neither Christian nor Muslim. And yes, you do get carried away with long posts as does everybody – and you seem to be an enthusiastic point scorer.

    And there are actually a lot of misguided so-called Christian preachers, revelationers, creationists etc who do a lot of harm in the world. I’ve heard that Uganda, for example, despite recent tragedies, still has a load of missions, funded from the USA, preaching that the end of the world is at hand to such an extent that people aren’t even bothering to till their fields. Real science is being ignored for the sake of creationism, and IMHO the Christian right is probably behind what I believe is a discernible lack of even-handedness in the USA’s attitude to middle eastern problems. Maybe they aren’t respected by you, but they seem to be respected by G W Bush, and many of these preachers have their own TV stations.

    And the pope hasn’t helped, I would agree, with his latest remarks. And yes I have read the full context and I still think it was an unhelpful thing to say, and probably said quite deliberately, though I would agree that the response was interesting. It was in effect saying “Muslims are agressive” to which the response from some was “Kill the bastard”, which he must have thought proved his point rather neatly.

    And to you committed Muslims, without wishing to offend you, is it not possible that God actually wants everybody to be nice to each other? Didn’t your mother teach you that two wrongs don’t make a right? And maybe some of your spiritual leaders aren’t very wise or spiritual either?

    So now I am going to leave you guys to your argument. Wouldn’t it be nice if each of us tried simply to live as an altruistic human being, not being unpleasant to each other, and trying to resist vengeance?

    Have fun.

    bye.

  14. al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”THE POPE’S RECENT SPEECH COULD BE HARDLY CONSIDERED AS A DEBATE BUT A DECLERATION OF PUBLIC INSULT TO ISLAM ? A DEBATE HAS TO BE EXCHANGE OF OPINION BETWEEN 2 INDIVIDUALS, DID THAT HAPPEN ? IT DIDN’T HMMM, MAYBE IT DID HAPPEN IN HEIGOU’S DELUSION CONSIOUSNESS, WHERE VISUAL AND AUDITORY HALLUCINATIONS IS POSSIBLE.”

    Is that a question or a statement? The Pope’s comments were part of a debate with students about the role of reason and natural law in theology. He was not trying to have a debate with the Muslim world and certainly he was not trying to insult Islam. Nothing he said was untrue anyway although I can see why the Emperor that he quoted might have upset Muslims.

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”ANYWAY LETS GO ON, I WONDER WHY DID THIS PSYCHO MENTION HONOR KILLINGS ALL OF A SUDDEN. IT MUST BE THAT HE OR SHE IS TRYING TO CONNECT THIS BARBARIC ACT TO ISLAM.”

    Actually I cite them as an example of something that a religion permits even though it formally condemns them. They are a good example.

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”TO ALL MUSLIMS AND NON-MUSLIMS HONOR KILLING IS SOMETHING THAT ISLAM AND ITS PROPHET HAS CONDEMN. FOR MURDER REGARDLESS OF SEX OF THE VICTIM OR MURDERER OR THE OBJECTIVE BEHIND IT ITS SOMETHING NOT TAKEN LIGHTLY IN ISLAM ESPECIALLY BETWEEN MUSLIMS.”

    And yet that is not my point. I said that Islam condemns them. I also said that Islamic law allows them – to whom does the killer pay the diya if he was sent by his father to murder his sister?

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”ANY ACT OF MURDER EVEN TO A WOMEN WHO HAS COMMITED ZINA OR ADULTERY BY FAMILY MEMBERS IS WRONG, FOR ACT OF CONVICTING HER IS TO BE DONE BY THE SHARIAH COURT AND NO OTHER, AND SHE MUST BE GIVEN A FAIR TRAIL WITH PROPER EVIDENCE BEFORE ANY FINAL JUDGEMENT OR SENTENCE GIVEN.”

    Where does it say a Sharia court needs to give a sentence? Are we all responsible for forbidding the evil and encouraging the good?

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”FOR THE ACT OF HONOUR KILLINGS BY MALE FAMILY MEMBERS PUTS THEM TO THE CATOGERY A LIFE FOR A LIFE AND THEREFORE THERE IS POSSIBILITY OF THEM IN FACING THE DEATH PENALTY TOO.AS WE CAN SEE HONOUR KILLINGS IS A PRACTISE THAT PREDATES ISLAM AND ISLAM STRICLY FORBIDS EXECUTION WITHOUT LEGAL JUSTIFICATION.”

    The possibility. I agree. But who decides if the death sentence is passed or if the murder can pay a diya? The Wali right? Who is the dead girl’s wali? It does predate Islam, but so what?

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”The Arabic word used in Noble Verse 4:34 above is “idribuhunna”, which is derived from “daraba” which means “beat”. The thing with all of the Arabic words that are derived from the word “daraba” is that they don’t necessarily mean “hit”. The word “idribuhunna” for instance, could very well mean to “leave” them. It is exactly like telling someone to “beat it” or “drop it” in English.”

    This is a massive diversion into something I did not say, but it is worth noticing that the Quran almost always uses “daraba” to mean beat as in hit. And everyone used to think it did here too.

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”FUTHERMORE, IF HONOR KILLINGS IS INDEED DUE TO ISLAM WHY IS SUCH CULTURE NOT RAMPANT IN EASTERN MUSLIM COUNTRIES LIKE MALAYSIA AND INDONESIA ( LARGEST ISLAMIC POPULATION ), THIS FUTHER STRENGHTEN THE THEORY THAT HONOR KILLINGS IS CULTURAL MOTIVATED AND NOT RELIGION.”

    Malaysia and Indonesia are newly converted regions. They have a lot of non-Muslim practices. Women do not wear the burka. Some Indonesians are matrilineal. Islamic knowledge is poor. Like some Africans they do not practice all Muslim practices. However to become a good Muslim means becoming less Malay and more Arab. They gradually take Arab names, eat Arab food, dress in Arab clothing as they become better Muslims. No doubt they will also adopt two customs typical of the Muslim world – tribalism (Malaysia and Indonesia don’t do tribes much but nearly all the central Muslim lands do even where there were no tribes before Islam) and honor killings. It is not that Islam commands these customs and in fact specifically condemns both, but Islam commands other things which seem to cause them – why else would Arabs and Turks and so on live in tribes and kill their women?

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered (raped) her. She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That (man) did such and such to me. And when a company of the Emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her.

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). When he (the Prophet) was about to pass sentence, the man who (actually) had assaulted her stood up and said: Apostle of Allah, I am the man who did it to her.

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”He (the Prophet) said to the woman: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. And about the man who had intercourse with her, he said: Stone him to death.

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”He also said: He has repented to such an extent that if the people of Medina had repented similarly, it would have been accepted from them. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4366)””

    So the women who cried rape was on trial – why else would Muhammed have said “Go away for Allah has forgiven you”. Forgiven what? Why couldn’t she go away before? She was obviously in jail and on trial for rape until the culprit confessed.

    al-zarqawi said on 13 October 2006:”HOWEVER, A WORD OF CAUTION , IN ISLAM A CASE MUST BE CONSIDERED A TRUE RAPE BEFORE SENTENCE IS BEING PASSED ON, FOR IF THERE IS ANY EVIDENCE THAT IS POINTING TO CONSENTED SEX BY THE WOMEN THEN BOTH SHALL BE PUNISHED ESPEACIALLY IN ACQUITANCE (DATE) RAPE.”

    Any evidence? Canny Ong was held by a rapist. Two policemen checked their ID cards as they sat in a car together. It appears she was threatened and did not cry out. Would that constitute evidence pointing to consentual sexual given she did not do everything in her power to escape even though she might have died? So what you are saying is that if Sharia existed in Malaysia, her killer would be flogged for premarital sex but not executed for rape?

  15. al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”IF THAT IS THE CASE, WHY DID GEORGE BUSH CALL THE WAR ON TERORISM AS A CRUSADE ? AND ITALIAN PM SILVIO BERLUSCONI CALLED ISLAM A RELIGION INFERIOR TO WESTERN CIVILISATION POST SEPT 11?”

    Because “Crusade” in English means exactly the same as “Jihad”. It does not mean a war on Muslims. Berlusconi probably thinks that Islam is inferior to Western civilisation. All evidence seems to suggest so. They are perfectly reasonable comments and have nothing to do what anything you have claimed recently.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”ON THE CONTRARY YOU ALSO HAVE PROVE MY POINT OF A TYPICAL WESTERN ISLAMOPHOBE WHO BLAMES ISLAM AND ALL MUSLIMS FOR ACTIONS BY SOME EXTREME MUSLIMS. THEREFORE ANTI-ISLAMIC COMMENTS BY WESTERN LEADERS IS NOT A LIE ! WHEN I MEAN ISLAM IS PUT ON TRIAL IS DOES NOT ONLY MEAN THE WESTERN GOVERMENT, IT MEANT THE WESTERN SOCIETY ON THE WHOLE, THERE ARE SO MANY ANTI-ISLAMIC WEBSITES AND PROGRAMMES THAT ATTACK MUSLIMS POST-SEPT 11, CLAMING ISLAM INSPIRE TERRORISM AND SEPT 11.”

    I am an Islamo-realist. If Islam inspires OBL to kill I don’t think it is phobic to point out that fact. And it does. There are still no anti-Islamic comments from people like Bush and Blair. They make it clear this is not a war on Islam. What I said changes nothing. Western society as a whole? Wow. So websites make Bush wage a war on Islam does it? You’re reaching. There are websites because people are horrified by what they have discovered about Islam. Stop Muslims killing people and the websites will go away. No terrorism, no fear of terrorism.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”KARADZIC IS BOTH A CHRISTIAN AND SERBIAN NATIONALIST, WHILE THE WEST ON PAPER REJECTS AND CONDEMNS THE GENOCIDE LITTLE WAS DONE TO ACTUALLY STOP IT, NO MILITARY ACTION WAS TAKEN UPON SERBIA WHO MILITARILY SUPPORTED THE GENOCIDE NOT EVEN A SACTION BY UN. UNTIL KARADZIC HAS BEEN PUT A BULLET IN HIS HEAD LIKE DR.AZHARI OR BEING CAPTURED ALIVE YOUR CLAIM OF WESTERN AUTHORITIES OF HUNTING HIM IS NOTHING MORE BUT AN ACT OF HIPPOCRACY. AT LEAST MUSLIMS HAS GUNNED DOWN TERRORIST WHO ARE MUSLIMS I AM YET TO SEE THE SAME TO BE DONE BY THE WEST.”

    He is a Serbian nationalist, not a Christian. And you may have noticed that the West went to war with Serbia to save Kosovo. They also armed and funded the Bosnians and Croats to fight the Serbs so you are wrong, again, on every issue. Umm, I think you will find there were sanctions against Serbia in May 1992. But the fact that your Muslim and African brothers (who are a majority of the UN) did not support them earlier is not the West’s fault. Serbia is hiding him. There are still missing War Criminals from WW2 after all but that doesn’t mean the West isn’t looking for them. Muslims never hunt down terrorists who only kill non-Muslims. Not one. Only those who kill their own. Nor Top was dumb enough to kill Muslim Indonesians.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”DO ANYONE KNOW WHERE OSAMA ACTUALLY IS ? ARE YOU SAYING THE MAIN REASON HIS STILL AT LARGE BECAUSE MUSLIMS GOVERMENT ESPEACIALLY PAKISTAN ARE HELPING HIM TO HIDE? HE IS A TERRORIST FOR GODSAKE AND KNOWS HOW TO HIDE AND MOVE BETWEEN THE BORDER OF PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN WHOSE MOUNTAIN AND CAVE TERRAIN MAKES HIM AND REMAINING AL-QAEDA UNIT DIFFICULT TO DETECT.”

    I think we all know he is in Waziristan. And yes I am saying that the Pakistanis, especially the Waziris, are protecting him including the ISI.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”ONE MORE THING ON THE WAR ON TERROR, DID EVER THE US CONSULTED THE OIC ON HOW TO BATTLE TERRORISM? NO! MUSLIM NATION OPINION WERE NEVER WELCOME INSTEAD THE US MADE A FAMOUS CLAIM EITHER YOU WITH US OR AGAINST US AND STARTED DRAFTING A ONE SIDED WAR PLAN AND INVADING AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ.”

    They did consult the OIC but they refused and still refuse to help. Muslims have been welcome – the US is tolerating Pakistan still as it plays both sides. It is an ally of Egypt and Saudi Arabia. It even welcomed support from Syria. Again you are simply wrong.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”NO I AM NOT IN LEAVING IN A CAVE AND YES THERE ARE WESTERN SOCIETY WHO ARE SENSIBLE (THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE YOU )”

    So you were wrong or you lied. Fine.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”THERE ARE MANY MORE WHO ALSO SUPPORT PRESIDENT’S BUSH ACT OF WAR THATS WHY HE WAS ELECTED FOR THE 2ND TIME. THIS SHOWS MANY OF THE WEST STILL SUPPORT THIS UNJUST WAR.”

    Sure a lot of people support him. So what? The war is not unjust.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”THATS BECAUSE THE ALLIES CLAIM THAT THEY ARE LIBERATING IRAQ, BUT IN REALITY THEY ARE JUST REPLACING SADDAM’S CRUEL REGIME WHICH MAKE THEM HIPPOCRATES. CAN YOU PLS TELL ME WHAT ARE THE TOTURES THAT YOU CLAIM HAPPENING IN IRAN, SAUDI ARABIA, JORDAN, EGYPT AND IRAN ? THEN ALL OF A SUDDEM WHY ARE YOU COMPARING AMERICAN TORTURE TO MORROCAN (WHICH NON OF THE EXAMPLES OF THE ABOVE)? WHATS WRONG TOO MUCH ANTI ISLAM SENTIMENT IN YOUR BRAIN ? I SEE AN ISLAMOPHOBE SEIZURE GOING HERE.SO ARE YOU SAYING YOU SUPPORT THE TORTURE IN ABU GHARIB ?”

    Well no. They would have replaced Saddam with democracy if the Iraqis had wanted it. They prefer to kill each other. They could have been Japan or Germany. They have chosen to be Somalia or North Korea. You can trivially find accounts from your Muslim brothers about the prisons of Saudi Arabia. The internet is full of such accounts. The Americans handed AG over to the Iraqis recently and the Iraqi prisoners begged the Americans not to go and leave them to their own fellow Iraqis. I am not doing it all of a sudden. I have consistently opposed all torture in the Middle East. It only looks sudden to you because you do not care what Muslims do to each other – only what the West does. You are happy with Muslims torturing each other. Why?

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”TILL THE DAY PFC STEVE GREEN IS SENTENCE FOR EXECUTION PLS DON’T MAKE ANY CLAIMS OF AMERICAN JUSTICE”

    At least he is on trial. When has a Muslim soldier ever gone on trial for killing a non-Muslim in a Muslim country?

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”ANYWAY THE AMERICAN MARINE MEDIC WHO KILLED AN INNOCENT IRAQI WAS ONLY SENTENCE TO 10 YEARS IN PRISON.”

    He testified and struck a plea bargain.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”IN MALAYSIA, A MUSLIM MAN AHMAD NAJIP, HAS BEEN SENTENCED TO THE GALLOWS FOR RAPING AND KILLING CANNY ONG A NON MUSLIM WOMEN.DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION (YOU CAN CHECK IN THE NET.) CAN YOU PLZ POINT TO ME ON YOUR SOURCES WHICH INFORMS ON RAPE DONE BY EGYPTIAN AND SYRIAN ARMY ?”

    Sentenced to death. Not executed. And he had to try to get executed by refusing to defend himself at all. Let’s see if he is actually killed. I can trivially point to the behavior of the Egyptian Army in Yemen and go talk to some Lebanese.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”THE ACT OF KILLING INNOCENT MUSLIM AND NON-MUSLIM CIVILIANS BY MUSLIMS AND NON MUSLIMS IS AN ACT MANY MUSLIMS HAVE CONDEMN AND THERE ARE MANY MUSLIMS SCHOLARS WHO SUPPORT THIS.”

    The key word there is “innocent” and with Muslims it usually turns out no one is innocent. When did any Muslims ever condemn terrorism – and hence the murder of innocents – before America made them after 9-11? When did they do it before they were attacked by terrorists themselves? Nowhere? Sheik Qaradawi says that suicide bombings in Palestine are fard. He does not condemn the murder of innocents.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”AND MANY MUSLIM LEADERS HAVE ALSO CONDEMN THE ACT TERRORISM, THE LATE ARAFAT CONDEMN AND SHOWED EMPATHY FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ON THE EVE SEPI 11 ITSELF AND DON’T FORGET THERE WERE MUSLIMS TOO WHO RALLIED IN THE PROTEST AGAINST SEPT 11 IN THE US.”

    Arafat knew he had to pretend but his fellow Palestinians celebrated in the streets. Which Muslims rallied in America?

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”FUTHERMORE WHICH OPINION POLL ARE YOU REFERING TO GENERALISED THAT MUSLIMS AROUND THE WORLD SUPPORT ACT OF TERRORISM ? WHICH STUDY ?”

    The Pew Center does regular reports on opinion across the world.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”FUTHERMORE MOST ISLAMIC TERROR CELL PRE TO SEPT 11 EXCEPT HAMAS HAS BEEN ALMOST OBLITERATED, COULD THAT HAVE BEEN ACHIVE IF THE MAJORITY MUSLIM LEADERS AND PEOPLE SUPPORT AND EMBRACE TERRRORISM. IF WE DID THE POPE WILL BE DECAPITATED BY NOW .”

    Really? JI was “almost obliterated”? LeT in Paksitan? I don’t think so. Yes it could because the Muslim world is full of dictators.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”IN 1975 EAST TIMORE WAS ABOUT TO BE ANOTHER COMMUNIST COUNTRY THEN INDONESIA BEING A PRO-DEMOCRACY NATION INVADED EAST TIMORE TO PREVENT THE DOMINO EFFECT FROM SPREADING. THE US AND AUSTRALIA BOTH WERE NOT AGAINST THIS IDEA AT THAT PERIOD. FROM BEING PRO-COMMUNIS, EAST TIMOR TURN COATS TO BE NATIONALIST AND STARTED MILITARY GURIELLA STRIKES AGAINST INDONESIAN MILITARY AND NON MILITARY TARGETS.ON THE CONTRARY TO WHAT YOU HAVE MENTION, THE EAST TIMORES DIDN’T GRACEFULLY ACCEPT INDONESIAN PRESENCE BUT ENGAGED IN GURIELLA WARFARE TACTICS SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE PLO AT THAT TIME.”

    I never said they gracefully accepted it. I said they did not behead people on the internet. I said they did not murder school girls – unlike your fellow Malays in Ambon. So what if it was “about” to become a Communist country. Nothing I said was untrue, nothing you have said is relevant.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”THUS FROM 1975-1999 BOTH SIDES COMMIT ATTROCITIES IN ORDER TO WIN THE WAR”

    Except the Indonesians killed a fifth of the population. Atrocities? What atrocities did the East Timorese commit? Name three.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”BUT UNLIKE THE PLO THIER MOVEMENT ARE NOT CONSIDERED TERRORIST BUT FREEDOM FIGHTERS.”

    They did not commit terrorist acts. They did not blow up night clubs. They did not murder civilians and plenty of people still called them terrorists.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”THE CASUALTIES OF TIMORESE FROM DIRECT WAR ATTROCITIES TO COLLATERAL DAMAGE WERE 18,600 WHILE A NUMBER 84,200 PEOPLE DIED FROM STARVATION AND ILLNESS.”

    Starvation caused by Indonesia and you are wrong about the figures. About 200,000 East Timorese died. Vastly more suffering than any Muslims. Did they murder any school girls?

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”THEN AGAIN 500,00O IRAQI CHILDREN ALSO DIED OF STARVATION DUE TO UN SACTIONS BUT HEIGOU IS GONNA SAY ITS SADDAM FAULT FOR INVADING KUWAIT.”

    Yes and I am going to say it is the fault of the Arab, Muslim and African dominated UN for voting for sanctions.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”AND FOR YOUR INFORMATION THE SUFFERING OF PALESTINIAN AND IRAQIS ARE BEING FELT BY ALL MUSLIMS”

    Sure. Because they do not care about the suffering of kafirs in East Timor. Muslims only care about other Muslims – they have ceased to have hearts.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”SADLY SOME OF THEM CHOSE THE WRONG PATH OF TERRORISM TO EXPRESS THEIR REBELLION AGAINST THE ZIONIS AND ALLIES INVASION BY ATTACKING THIER CIVILIANS, THATS WHY YOU HAVE PEOPLE LIKE OSAMA AMD DR. AZHARI. IM WARNING YOU NOT TO SLYLY TWIST MY STATEMENT HERE, FOR I AM AGAINST THE OCCUPATION OF PALESTINE AND IRAQ BY THE WEST, BUT IT DOESN’T MEAN I SUPPORT AL-QAEDA OR ANY MUSLIM FANATICS AND ALL UNISLAMIC ACTS THAT THEY HAVE COMMITED.”

    And yet you defend them. Either you support terrorism or you do not. Yet you excuse it. I do not have to twist your words. You condemn yourself.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”ARE SURE WESTERN CHRISTIAN DID NOT OPPRESS MUSLIMS”

    Read what I write. I specifically said they did but now they don’t. No terrorism when they did. Plenty now they don’t.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”WHEN ITALY INVADED LIBYA IN 1911, THE GREAT UMAR MUKHTAR LED A REBELLION AGAINST THE ITALIAN COLONIALS JUST BEFORE THAT ERA.MORE THAN 125,OOO LIBYAN WOMEN, MEN AND CHILDREN WERE PUT TO CONCENTRATION CAMPS AMD 2/3 FROM THESE PERISH.”

    And your point is what exactly?

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”ONE MORE THING ZARQAWI HAPPENS TO BE MY MIDDLE NAME GIVEN BY MY PARENTS, SO DON’T TRY ANYTHING PERSONAL HERE AND BACK OFF.”

    But you choose to use it. Therefore you have no right to claim you condemn terrorism when you plainly do not.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”IF YOU EAST TIMORESE GURIELLA MOVEMENT TO BE CIVILISED THEN SO ARE THE INSURGENTS IN IRAQ AND ISRAEL.”

    The East Timorese never beheaded anyone and put the video on the internet. They did not behead school girls either. They may have been Communists but they were not Muslims.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”YOU SEE HEIGOU THERE ARE MUSLIMS OUT THERE WITH THE NAME OF ZARQAWI NOT ONLY ABU MUSAB AL-ZARQAWI WHO IS RECENTLY KILLED BY THE ALLIES. SO YOUR ARE SAYING EVERYONE WITH THE NAME ZARQAWI SHOULD BE TREATED LIKE A TERRORIST? YOU ARE INDEED AN ISLAMAPHOBE BY DRAWING SUCH BASELESS CONCLUSION AS THIS.”

    Anyone who chooses to use that name, and I do not accept that it is a proper Muslim name at all, is clearly sympathising with the original. You have chosen it. We all know what you mean.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”AND YOU ARE SIMPLY TWISTING THE EVIDENCE, YES A RAID IS CONDUCTED BY NATO THEY GOT HIS SON BUT REALEASED HIM 10 DAYS LATER AND PRESSURE HIS FAMILY BUT NATO TOOK 6 YEARS TO ORGANIZE A PATHETIC ATTEMP THAT MEANT TO FAIL, IT TOOK THE ALLIES LESS THAN 3 MONTHS TO INVADE AFGHANISTAN AND DESTROY AL -QAEDA AND THE TALIBAN.”

    I am twisting nothing. That they got his son proved how close they were. But his son and his wife did not kill anyone and so had to be let go. Meant to fail? You have no evidence of that. It took no time to bomb Serbia into surrender either but they have not managed to catch OBL. Bombing is easy. Arresting people is not. They cannot do it in Afghanistan or Serbia.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”SEE THE DIFFRENCE ON SWIFTNESS OF ACTION. AMBON WAS A RELIGIOUS RIOT NOT CAUSED BY THE INDONESIAN GOVERMENT BUT BY CHRISTIAN TERRORIST (RECENTLY EXECUTED) WHO STARED THE RIOT BY KILLING MUSLIMS AND BURNING THE AMBON MOSQUE, CHRISTIAN ALL OVER THE WORLD KEPT QUIET INITIALLY WHEN THE RIOT STARTED BECAUSE MORE MUSLIMS WERE BEING KILLED AND DRIVEN OFF THIER HOMES, ONLY WHEN SWIFT MUSLIM RETIALION OCCURED, AND THE CHRISTIAN TERRORIST BEING COUNTER MASSACRED IT BECAME A CHRISTIAN CRISIS.”

    It was entirely caused by Muslim radicals fed a diet of hate by the Indonesian government. Those poor men died because they defended themselves from Jihadi terrorists. The violence was started by Muslims who attacked Christians. The world did not care because it was a problem for Indonesians to sort out. The world still does not care.

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”WHAT ABOUT THE MASSACRE DONE BY CHRISTIAN DAYAK’S OF KALIMANTAN WHO DECAPITATED THOUSANDS OF MUSLIM MADURANESE, WHY DIDN’T YOU MENTION THIS ? WHY, YOU DIDN’T THINK CHRISTIAN’S COULD CUT OFF HEADS OF LITTLE CHILDREN ?”

    Who said they were Dayaks? Again the indigenous peoples defend themselves against Muslim oppression. Good for them. What children were decapitated by these pagan Dayaks?

    al-zarqawi said on 11 October 2006:”ONLY A PSYCHOTIC PERSON LIKE YOU WILL SAY THE CRUSADES ARE AN ACT OF SELF DEFENCE, IN 1099 CHRISTIAN CRUSADERS AFTER TAKING JERUSALEM MASSACRED ALL MUSLIM AND JEWISH POPULATION INCLUDING WOMEN AND CHILDREN WHO ARE NON-COMBATANTS”

    Indeed they did. Jerusalem the Christian city which the Muslims invaded and took from them. Islam came from Arabia, not Palestine. It was Roman. It was self defence to try and liberate it.

  16. In the name of Allah, most Gracious, most merciful.

    heigou’s qoute,

    Richard said on 10 October 2006:”In the meantime would somebody, without quoting out of context, be interested in a simply theological debate on the essential differences in religion?”

    Well the Pope tried that didn’t he? At some point people do things because they think their religion either tells them to or at least allows it. The religion may not even tell them to. It may even be opposed to it, but there is usually a justification in there somewhere. Take honor killings for instance. It is never enough to discuss the theology.

    THE POPE’S RECENT SPEECH COULD BE HARDLY CONSIDERED AS A DEBATE BUT A DECLERATION OF PUBLIC INSULT TO ISLAM ? A DEBATE HAS TO BE EXCHANGE OF OPINION BETWEEN 2 INDIVIDUALS, DID THAT HAPPEN ? IT DIDN’T HMMM, MAYBE IT DID HAPPEN IN HEIGOU’S DELUSION CONSIOUSNESS, WHERE VISUAL AND AUDITORY HALLUCINATIONS IS POSSIBLE.

    ANYWAY LETS GO ON, I WONDER WHY DID THIS PSYCHO MENTION HONOR KILLINGS ALL OF A SUDDEN. IT MUST BE THAT HE OR SHE IS TRYING TO CONNECT THIS BARBARIC ACT TO ISLAM.

    1. DEFINATION OF HONOR KILLINGS BY HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH
    Honor crimes are acts of violence, usually murder, committed by male family members against female family members, who are perceived to have brought dishonor upon the family. A woman can be targeted by (individuals within) her family for a variety of reasons, including: refusing to enter into an arranged marriage, being the victim of a sexual assault, seeking a divorce — even from an abusive husband — or (allegedly) committing adultery. The mere perception that a woman has behaved in a specific way to “dishonor” her family, is sufficient to trigger an attack. [1]

    TO ALL MUSLIMS AND NON-MUSLIMS HONOR KILLING IS SOMETHING THAT ISLAM AND ITS PROPHET HAS CONDEMN. FOR MURDER REGARDLESS OF SEX OF THE VICTIM OR MURDERER OR THE OBJECTIVE BEHIND IT ITS SOMETHING NOT TAKEN LIGHTLY IN ISLAM ESPECIALLY BETWEEN MUSLIMS.

    THIS CAN BE PROVEN FROM THE AL-QURAN AND HADIS :

    Whoso slayeth a believer of set purpose, his reward is Hell for ever. Allah is wroth against him and He hath cursed him and prepared for him an awful doom.” (An-Nisa’: 93)

    ANY ACT OF MURDER EVEN TO A WOMEN WHO HAS COMMITED ZINA OR ADULTERY BY FAMILY MEMBERS IS WRONG, FOR ACT OF CONVICTING HER IS TO BE DONE BY THE SHARIAH COURT AND NO OTHER, AND SHE MUST BE GIVEN A FAIR TRAIL WITH PROPER EVIDENCE BEFORE ANY FINAL JUDGEMENT OR SENTENCE GIVEN.

    The blood of a Muslim may not be legally spilt other than in one of three [instances]: the married person who commits adultery; a life for a life; and one who forsakes his religion and abandons the community.” (Reported by Al-Bukhari and Muslim)

    THIS HADIS NOTES THAT IF A MUSLIM REGARGLESS A MAN OR WOMEN IS FOUND COMMITING ADULTERY AFTER MARRIAGE IF RIGHTFULLY CONVICTED IS TO BE SENTENCE TO DEATH BY THE AUTHORITIES NOT FAMILY MEMBERS, FOR THE ACT OF HONOUR KILLINGS BY MALE FAMILY MEMBERS PUTS THEM TO THE CATOGERY A LIFE FOR A LIFE AND THEREFORE THERE IS POSSIBILITY OF THEM IN FACING THE DEATH PENALTY TOO.AS WE CAN SEE HONOUR KILLINGS IS A PRACTISE THAT PREDATES ISLAM AND ISLAM STRICLY FORBIDS EXECUTION WITHOUT LEGAL JUSTIFICATION.

    HOWEVER, HEIGOU IS GONNA RESPOND BY SAYING MUSLIM COUNTRIES DO NOT PUNISH THE PERPETRATORS OR THEY ESCAPED WITH LIGHT SENTENCE.

    THAT IS BECAUSE THE ACT OF HONOR KILLINGS IS STRONG CULTURAL HERITAGE (NOT RELIGIOUS) IN SOME MUSLIM COUNTRIES. MOST OF THE CASES ARE HAPPENING IN REMOTES AREA AND MOST OF THE TIME IT WAS NOT REPORTED.
    CERTAIN BIAS LAWS PROTECTING THE PERPETRATORS OF HONOUR KILLING ARE DRAFTED DUE TO CULTURAL AND POLITICAL INFLUNCE RATHER THAN RELIGION. ALTHOUGH WE CAN SEE STEPS BEING TAKEN TO COMBAT THIS, BUT IN MY OPINION MORE AGGRESIVE STEPS ESPECIALLY BY SHARIA AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES OF AFFECTED MUSLIM COUNTRIES MUST BE CARRY OUT BY SENTENCING THE PERPETRATORS TO LONGER PRISON SENTENCE, CANING OR EVEN DEATH SENTENCE.

    SECONDLY, SOME WOULD SAY THE DEATH SENTENCE OF THE SHARIAH TO THOSE WHO COMMIT ADULTERY IS WHAT BASICLY INSPIRED MANY MUSLIM MEN TO TAKE THEIR OWN ACTION. WE CAN SEE THIS FROM HEIGOU’S STATEMENT

    At some point people do things because they think their religion either tells them to or at least allows it. The religion may not even tell them to. It may even be opposed to it, but there is usually a justification in there somewhere.

    THIS PSYCHOTIC ANAK HARAM IS TRYING TO INDICATE THAT SOMEWHERE IN THE QURAN AND HADIS THATS ORDERS SUCH ACTS. THE ANSWER IS NO AS HONOUR KILLINGS IS A JAHILIYAH ACTS THAT PREDATES ISLAM, HOWEVER THERE ARE SOME ANTI-ISLAMIC INFEDELS WHO ARE THE SAME SPECIES AS HEIGOU THAT HAS PURPOSELY MISINTERPRATE QURANIC STATEMENTS AND HADIS, IN WHICH THEY WILL CLAIM ALTHOUGH CALL FOR HONOUR KILLINGS ARE NOT DIRECTLY FOUND IN ISLAMIC DOCTRINES, BUT ISLAM INDIRECTLY DISCRIMINATES WOMEN AND THAT LEAD TO VIOLENTS ACTION AGAINST THEM. ONE OF THE MOST COMMON FIRMAN THAT WAS MISINTERPRATED IS
    THE VERSE 4:34 WHICH IS :-

    Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

    THE EXPLANATION ARE AS FOLLOWS :-

    The Arabic word used in Noble Verse 4:34 above is “idribuhunna”, which is derived from “daraba” which means “beat”. The thing with all of the Arabic words that are derived from the word “daraba” is that they don’t necessarily mean “hit”. The word “idribuhunna” for instance, could very well mean to “leave” them. It is exactly like telling someone to “beat it” or “drop it” in English.

    Allah Almighty used the word “daraba” in Noble Verse 14:24 “Seest thou not how Allah sets (daraba) forth a parable? — A goodly Word Like a goodly tree, Whose root is firmly fixed, And its branches (reach) To the heavens”. “daraba” here meant “give an example”. If I say in Arabic “daraba laka mathal”, it means “give you an example”.

    Allah Almighty also used the word “darabtum”, which is derived from the word “daraba” in Noble Verse 4:94, which mean to “go abroad” in the sake of Allah Almighty:

    “O ye who believe! When ye go abroad (darabtum) In the cause of Allah, Investigate carefully, And say not to anyone Who offers you a salutation: ‘Thou art none of a Believer!’ Coveting the perishable good Of this life: with Allah Are profits and spoils abundant. Even thus were ye yourselves Before, till Allah conferred On you His favours: therefore Carefully investigate. For Allah is well aware Of all that ye do. (The Noble Quran, 4:94)”

    So “daraba” literally means “beat”, or “go abroad”, or “give” but not in the sense to give something by hand, but rather to give or provide an example.

    Important Note: Notice how Allah Almighty in Noble Chapter (Surah) 4 He used “daraba (4:34” and “darabtum (4:94)”, which are both derived from the same root. He used both words in the same Chapter, which tells me that “daraba” in Noble Verse 4:34 means to desert or leave, since that’s what its derived word meant in Noble Verse 4:94. The next section below will further prove my point.

    I am sure there are more Noble Verses that used words derived from “daraba” in the Noble Quran, but these are the only ones I know of so far. In the case of Noble Verse 4:34 where Allah Almighty seems to allow men to hit their wives after the two warnings for ill-conduct and disloyalty, it could very well be that Allah Almighty meant to command the Muslims to “leave” the home all together and desert their wives for a long time in a hope that the wives would then come back to their senses and repent.

    FUTHERMORE, IF HONOR KILLINGS IS INDEED DUE TO ISLAM WHY IS SUCH CULTURE NOT RAMPANT IN EASTERN MUSLIM COUNTRIES LIKE MALAYSIA AND INDONESIA ( LARGEST ISLAMIC POPULATION ), THIS FUTHER STRENGHTEN THE THEORY THAT HONOR KILLINGS IS CULTURAL MOTIVATED AND NOT RELIGION.

    BEFORE I GO I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW TO MUSLIMS AND NON-MUSLIMS A HADIS THAT SHOWS ISLAMS NOT ONLY PUNISH RAPIST BUT THE VICTIM OF THE RAPE IS CONSIDERED INNOCENT.

    When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered (raped) her. She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That (man) did such and such to me. And when a company of the Emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her.

    She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). When he (the Prophet) was about to pass sentence, the man who (actually) had assaulted her stood up and said: Apostle of Allah, I am the man who did it to her.

    He (the Prophet) said to the woman: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. And about the man who had intercourse with her, he said: Stone him to death.

    He also said: He has repented to such an extent that if the people of Medina had repented similarly, it would have been accepted from them. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4366)”

    HOWEVER, A WORD OF CAUTION , IN ISLAM A CASE MUST BE CONSIDERED A TRUE RAPE BEFORE SENTENCE IS BEING PASSED ON, FOR IF THERE IS ANY EVIDENCE THAT IS POINTING TO CONSENTED SEX BY THE WOMEN THEN BOTH SHALL BE PUNISHED ESPEACIALLY IN ACQUITANCE (DATE) RAPE.

  17. In the name of Allah, most gracious, most merciful.

    The qoute of Heigou.
    t is impossible to take anyone who uses your nom d’guerre seriously on this subject. You simply prove my point. Muslims have not rejected terrorism. In fact they are proud of it. If they weren’t you would be reprimanded for that but you haven’t and you won’t be either. All the disclaimers about Islam are meaningless because by their actions Muslims show what they really think.

    As to your comments, Islam has not been put on trial. Every Western leader has been very careful to point out that this is a war on terrorism, not on Islam, that Islam is peace-loving and that it is being distorted by a radical minority rejected by the mainstream. You cannot find a single comment by a single Western leader to the contrary. So your angry, self-righteous, victimhood is based on a lie.

    IF THAT IS THE CASE, WHY DID GEORGE BUSH CALL THE WAR ON TERORISM AS A CRUSADE ? AND ITALIAN PM SILVIO BERLUSCONI CALLED ISLAM A RELIGION INFERIOR TO WESTERN CIVILISATION POST SEPT 11?
    WHAT KIND OF COMMENT ARE THESE! ON THE CONTRARY YOU ALSO HAVE PROVE MY POINT OF A TYPICAL WESTERN ISLAMOPHOBE WHO BLAMES ISLAM AND ALL MUSLIMS FOR ACTIONS BY SOME EXTREME MUSLIMS. THEREFORE ANTI-ISLAMIC COMMENTS BY WESTERN LEADERS IS NOT A LIE ! WHEN I MEAN ISLAM IS PUT ON TRIAL IS DOES NOT ONLY MEAN THE WESTERN GOVERMENT, IT MEANT THE WESTERN SOCIETY ON THE WHOLE, THERE ARE SO MANY ANTI-ISLAMIC WEBSITES AND PROGRAMMES THAT ATTACK MUSLIMS POST-SEPT 11, CLAMING ISLAM INSPIRE TERRORISM AND SEPT 11. YOU ARE ONE EXAMPLE PRODUCTS OF SUCH PERJUDICE. YOUR DOUBLE STANDARDS HERE IS CLEAR, WHEN I ACCUSED OF WESTERN PREJUDICE TOWARDS ISLAM YOU COMMENTED THE ACT PLAYED BY WESTERN GOVERMENTS ONLY, WHILE DENYING THE INDIRECT MENTAL AND PHYSICAL ABUSE OF MUSLIMS AND ISLAM BY THE PREDOMINANTLY CHRISTIAN GENERAL POPULATION OF THE WEST. THE GREATEST TESTIMONY OF WESTERN SUPPORT IN ENGAGING ISLAM IS THE CONTINIUM OF THEIR ELECTION BY THE PEOPLE, ASISTED BY ACTS TERRORISM BY MINORITY MUSLIM FANATICS.

    The qoute of Heigou,
    Karadic was not a Christian but a Serbian nationalist and ten seconds of searching will find plenty of Western condemnations of his ideology. Moreover ten seconds searching will find an utter and total rejection by the West of him, his ideology and what he did to the extent that the West is tracking him and all his minions down to put them on trial for their crimes. Muslims do not do the same for their own terrorists (unless they attack Muslim countries) and so the difference is clear. The West rejects such acts.

    KARADZIC IS BOTH A CHRISTIAN AND SERBIAN NATIONALIST, WHILE THE WEST ON PAPER REJECTS AND CONDEMNS THE GENOCIDE LITTLE WAS DONE TO ACTUALLY STOP IT, NO MILITARY ACTION WAS TAKEN UPON SERBIA WHO MILITARILY SUPPORTED THE GENOCIDE NOT EVEN A SACTION BY UN. UNTIL KARADZIC HAS BEEN PUT A BULLET IN HIS HEAD LIKE DR.AZHARI OR BEING CAPTURED ALIVE YOUR CLAIM OF WESTERN AUTHORITIES OF HUNTING HIM IS NOTHING MORE BUT AN ACT OF HIPPOCRACY. AT LEAST MUSLIMS HAS GUNNED DOWN TERRORIST WHO ARE MUSLIMS I AM YET TO SEE THE SAME TO BE DONE BY THE WEST.

    The qoute of Heigou,
    That is absurd – both attempts are mediocre. And yet dozens of Serbians have been sentenced to long jail terms for what they did in Bosnia. No Muslim country has done much to help track down OBL with the minor exception of Pakistan which was forced to by threats of being bombed into the stone age. The West hates such crimes. Can you say the same about the Muslim world?

    DO ANYONE KNOW WHERE OSAMA ACTUALLY IS ? ARE YOU SAYING THE MAIN REASON HIS STILL AT LARGE BECAUSE MUSLIMS GOVERMENT ESPEACIALLY PAKISTAN ARE HELPING HIM TO HIDE? HE IS A TERRORIST FOR GODSAKE AND KNOWS HOW TO HIDE AND MOVE BETWEEN THE BORDER OF PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN WHOSE MOUNTAIN AND CAVE TERRAIN MAKES HIM AND REMAINING AL-QAEDA UNIT DIFFICULT TO DETECT. IF IT WAS EASY THE ALLIES SHOULD HAVE GOT TO HIM FIRST WHEN THEY INVADE AFGHANISTAN AND DESTROYED THE TALIBAN. PLZ DON’T BLAME THE FAILURE OF WESTERN MILITARY AND PUT MUSLIM NATIONS AS THE SCAPEGOAT FOR THIS. ONE MORE THING ON THE WAR ON TERROR, DID EVER THE US CONSULTED THE OIC ON HOW TO BATTLE TERRORISM? NO! MUSLIM NATION OPINION WERE NEVER WELCOME INSTEAD THE US MADE A FAMOUS CLAIM EITHER YOU WITH US OR AGAINST US AND STARTED DRAFTING A ONE SIDED WAR PLAN AND INVADING AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ.IF THIS IS SUCH A NOBLE CAUSE WHY DIDN’T OTHER NON-MUSLIM POWER LIKE RUSIA, CHINA AND FRANCE JOIN IN THE WAR! WHAT IS THERE FOR MUSLIMS TO DO WHEN ALLIES HAVE ALREADY CAPTURED AND TORTURED ALL SUSPECTS OF AL-QAEDA IN GUANTANAMOBE AND OTHER SECRET CIA TORTURE CAMPS ! THIS IS A CLAIM MADE BY BUSH HIMSELF ! AND FOR YOUR INFORMATION ISLAMIC COUNTRIES LIKE MALAYSIA HAS RETAIN FORMER MALAYSIAN MUSLIMS WHO WERE WITH THE TALIBAN TILL TODAY UNDER THE ISA ACT !

    The qoute of Heigou,

    There are no Western Crusaders and to be secular and Christian is absurd. Silence? Are you living in a cave? Have you not noticed the millions of people who took to the streets in the West to protest the War in Iraq? Where have you been? If Muslims kill Muslims in Iraq I do not see that as the West’s fault – who knew they would behave like this?

    NO I AM NOT IN LEAVING IN A CAVE AND YES THERE ARE WESTERN SOCIETY WHO ARE SENSIBLE (THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE YOU ) TO REALIZE THE CRUELTY BUT THERE ARE NOT MILLIONS, AND ON THE CONTRARY THERE ARE MANY MORE WHO ALSO SUPPORT PRESIDENT’S BUSH ACT OF WAR THATS WHY HE WAS ELECTED FOR THE 2ND TIME. THIS SHOWS MANY OF THE WEST STILL SUPPORT THIS UNJUST WAR. HOW SURE ARE YOU THAT THE COLLATERAL DAMAGE OF OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM DID NOT MAINLY CONTRIBUTE TO INNOCENT IRAQI CASUALTY ?

    The qoute of Heigou,
    Again how can you have missed the protests unless you are trying to ignore them? Where are the Muslim protests about torture in Saudi Arabia or Jordan or Egypt, or Iran or Iraq before the invasion? The police arrested a Mullah in Pakistan running his own private torture chamber just yesterday. Total silence from the Muslim world. What is it about American torture that is so much worse than Moroccan?

    THATS BECAUSE THE ALLIES CLAIM THAT THEY ARE LIBERATING IRAQ, BUT IN REALITY THEY ARE JUST REPLACING SADDAM’S CRUEL REGIME WHICH MAKE THEM HIPPOCRATES. CAN YOU PLS TELL ME WHAT ARE THE TOTURES THAT YOU CLAIM HAPPENING IN IRAN, SAUDI ARABIA, JORDAN, EGYPT AND IRAN ? THEN ALL OF A SUDDEM WHY ARE YOU COMPARING AMERICAN TORTURE TO MORROCAN (WHICH NON OF THE EXAMPLES OF THE ABOVE)? WHATS WRONG TOO MUCH ANTI ISLAM SENTIMENT IN YOUR BRAIN ? I SEE AN ISLAMOPHOBE SEIZURE GOING HERE.SO ARE YOU SAYING
    YOU SUPPORT THE TORTURE IN ABU GHARIB ?

    The qoute of heigou,
    or which they are on trial and if found guilty will be executed. When has any Muslim country ever executed a Muslim for raping a non-Muslim? When has a Muslim soldier ever even been put on trial for such a thing? The Syrian Army raped in Lebanon. The Egyptians did in Yemen. The Pakistani police do so every day. When was anyone tried for it?

    TILL THE DAY PFC STEVE GREEN IS SENTENCE FOR EXECUTION PLS DON’T MAKE ANY CLAIMS OF AMERICAN JUSTICE, ANYWAY THE AMERICAN MARINE MEDIC WHO KILLED AN INNOCENT IRAQI WAS ONLY SENTENCE TO 10 YEARS IN PRISON. CAN YOU PLZ POINT OUT TO ME ANY AMERICAN SOLDIER WHO HAS BEEN EXECUTED FOR WAR CRIMES? IN MALAYSIA, A MUSLIM MAN AHMAD NAJIP, HAS BEEN SENTENCED TO THE GALLOWS FOR RAPING AND KILLING CANNY ONG A NON MUSLIM WOMEN.DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION (YOU CAN CHECK IN THE NET.) CAN YOU PLZ POINT TO ME ON YOUR SOURCES WHICH INFORMS ON RAPE DONE BY EGYPTIAN AND SYRIAN ARMY ?

    the qoute of heigou,
    I beg to differ. Opinion poll after opinion poll shows that about half of all Muslims support what he is doing. As for Islam, well Islam is what Muslims do. When did Muslims ever fail to support the successful killing of innocent dhimmis? Can you point me to a book, by a historian or a scholar or a ruler or a novelist or anyone else, that has ever condemned the successful use of force by Muslims against non-Muslims? Whatever Islam says, far too many Muslims approve of such acts.

    THE ACT OF KILLING INNOCENT MUSLIM AND NON-MUSLIM CIVILIANS BY MUSLIMS AND NON MUSLIMS IS AN ACT MANY MUSLIMS HAVE CONDEMN AND THERE ARE MANY MUSLIMS SCHOLARS WHO SUPPORT THIS. ONE OF THEM IS USTAZ
    ABDUL RAHMAN MOHAMED IN HIS BOOK 30 EXTREMIST CHARACTERISTICS MENTIONED IN THE QURAN. AND MANY MUSLIM LEADERS HAVE ALSO CONDEMN THE ACT TERRORISM, THE LATE ARAFAT CONDEMN AND SHOWED EMPATHY FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ON THE EVE SEPI 11 ITSELF AND DON’T FORGET THERE WERE MUSLIMS TOO WHO RALLIED IN THE PROTEST AGAINST SEPT 11 IN THE US. FUTHERMORE WHICH OPINION POLL ARE YOU REFERING TO GENERALISED THAT MUSLIMS AROUND THE WORLD SUPPORT ACT OF TERRORISM ? WHICH STUDY ? FUTHERMORE MOST ISLAMIC TERROR CELL PRE TO SEPT 11 EXCEPT HAMAS HAS BEEN ALMOST OBLITERATED, COULD THAT HAVE BEEN ACHIVE IF THE MAJORITY MUSLIM LEADERS AND PEOPLE SUPPORT AND EMBRACE TERRRORISM. IF WE DID THE POPE WILL BE DECAPITATED BY NOW .

    the qoute of Heigou,
    Again we see you apologising and excusing terrorism. This utterly contradicts what you have claimed and shows how tricky Muslims can be with words – you condemn the taking of innocent life but then claim what Bin Laden does is self-defence and justified. Bin Laden is not a Palestinian. How was he affected? He did not care about them for years and years as he lived in Afghanistan. Now he claims he does. You take that seriously? Besides I can trivially prove you wrong – the East Timorese suffered vastly more than the Palestinians. They lost a fifth of their population. The equivalent of about 2.5 million Palestinians. Since 1987 the Israelis have killed just over 6000 Palestinians. Their suffering is trivial compared to the East Timorese. And yet, not one suicide bombing, not one cafe bombing, not one beheading. On the other hand the Muslims of Indonesia are not oppressed and yet too many of them rape Chinese women, behead school girls, blow up night clubs in Bali and so on. Tell me how the Indonesians are oppressed by the Balinese. What do these cases all have in common: on the one hand Muslims commit acts of terrorism whether or not they are “oppressed”, and on other, non-Muslims do not even though they are vastly more oppressed than the Palestinians. Draw your own conclusion.

    IN 1975 EAST TIMORE WAS ABOUT TO BE ANOTHER COMMUNIST COUNTRY THEN INDONESIA BEING A PRO-DEMOCRACY NATION INVADED EAST TIMORE TO PREVENT THE DOMINO EFFECT FROM SPREADING. THE US AND AUSTRALIA BOTH WERE NOT AGAINST THIS IDEA AT THAT PERIOD. FROM BEING PRO-COMMUNIS, EAST TIMOR TURN COATS TO BE NATIONALIST AND STARTED MILITARY GURIELLA STRIKES AGAINST INDONESIAN MILITARY AND NON MILITARY TARGETS.ON THE CONTRARY TO WHAT YOU HAVE MENTION, THE EAST TIMORES DIDN’T GRACEFULLY ACCEPT INDONESIAN PRESENCE BUT ENGAGED IN GURIELLA WARFARE TACTICS SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE PLO AT THAT TIME.
    THUS FROM 1975-1999 BOTH SIDES COMMIT ATTROCITIES IN ORDER TO WIN THE WAR, SIMILAR TO THAT IN VIETNAM. IF THE TIMORESE WERE SUCH NON -VIOLENT PEOPLE THE INDONESIAN MILITARY WOULD NOT HAVE SUFFERED 8OOO TO 10,000 CASUALTIES. THEY EXECUTED CAPTURED SOLDIERS, PRO-INDONESIAN TIMORESE, AND GOVERMENT OFFICIALS, BURN MOSQUES AND BOMB GOVERMENT BUILDINGS. BUT UNLIKE THE PLO THIER MOVEMENT ARE NOT CONSIDERED TERRORIST BUT FREEDOM FIGHTERS. THE CASUALTIES OF TIMORESE FROM DIRECT WAR ATTROCITIES TO COLLATERAL DAMAGE WERE 18,600 WHILE A NUMBER 84,200 PEOPLE DIED FROM STARVATION AND ILLNESS. THEN AGAIN 500,00O IRAQI CHILDREN ALSO DIED OF STARVATION DUE TO UN SACTIONS BUT HEIGOU IS GONNA SAY ITS SADDAM FAULT FOR INVADING KUWAIT. SO WHY DID THE TIMORESE ASSOCIATE WITH COMMUNISM IN THE FIRST PLACE ? IS IT FAIR TO SAY THEY DESERVE IT ? NO, SAME THING APPLIES TO THE PALESTINIAN AND IRAQIS WHO SUFFERED UNDER THE INVASION OF RESPECTIVE ALLIES AND ZIONIS INVASION. AND FOR YOUR INFORMATION THE SUFFERING OF PALESTINIAN AND IRAQIS ARE BEING FELT BY ALL MUSLIMS, SADLY SOME OF THEM CHOSE THE WRONG PATH OF TERRORISM TO EXPRESS THEIR REBELLION AGAINST THE ZIONIS AND ALLIES INVASION BY ATTACKING THIER CIVILIANS, THATS WHY YOU HAVE PEOPLE LIKE OSAMA AMD DR. AZHARI. IM WARNING YOU NOT TO SLYLY TWIST MY STATEMENT HERE, FOR I AM AGAINST THE OCCUPATION OF PALESTINE AND IRAQ BY THE WEST, BUT IT DOESN’T MEAN I SUPPORT AL-QAEDA OR ANY MUSLIM FANATICS AND ALL UNISLAMIC ACTS THAT THEY HAVE COMMITED.

    THE QOUTE OF HEIGOU,
    The West is not oppressing Muslims. Muslims oppress other Muslims. Indeed the less the West has oppressed Muslims, the more terrorism. There was no terrorism in 1920 when most Muslims were ruled by the West. There is now when virtually none are. Israel does not kill and destroy. It is a moderate and sensible country. It also has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Iranians are dangerous and have. They have to obey their own freely chosen legal obligations. When was Bin Laden’s family massacred by anyone? Or your hero Zarqawi’s? The Bin Ladens grew rich off the West. The East Timorese died in huge numbers but their response was civilised. They are also independent now. Can’t think why.

    ARE SURE WESTERN CHRISTIAN DID NOT OPPRESS MUSLIMS, WHEN ITALY INVADED LIBYA IN 1911, THE GREAT UMAR MUKHTAR LED A REBELLION AGAINST THE ITALIAN COLONIALS JUST BEFORE THAT ERA.MORE THAN 125,OOO LIBYAN WOMEN, MEN AND CHILDREN WERE PUT TO CONCENTRATION CAMPS AMD 2/3 FROM THESE PERISH. ISRAEL DOES NOT KILL AND DESTROY ? YOU ARE INDEED A LIAR, WASN’T IT YOUR OWN WORDS THAT SAY (Since 1987 the Israelis have killed just over 6000 Palestinians).THERE ARE INDEED A SENSIBLE NATION IN BATTLING HIZBOLLAH IN SOTHERN LEBONAN THEY ALSO ORGANIZED AIRSTRIKE IN NOTHERN LEBONAN, YA THATS SO THEM RESONABLE? ARE YOU ALSO TRYING TO COMPLY THAT IF IRAN DIDN’T SIGN NON-PROFILATION TREATY THEY COULD BUILD NUCLEAR POWER AND WARHEADS AND AMERICA AND ALLIES CAN ACCEPT THAT AND LEAVE IRAN ALONE ? NAH, ITS JUST WESTERN HIPPOCRACY HERE. ONE MORE THING ZARQAWI HAPPENS TO BE MY MIDDLE NAME GIVEN BY MY PARENTS, SO DON’T TRY ANYTHING PERSONAL HERE AND BACK OFF. IF YOU EAST TIMORESE GURIELLA MOVEMENT TO BE CIVILISED THEN SO ARE THE INSURGENTS IN IRAQ AND ISRAEL.

    THE QOUTE OF HEIGOU,
    Strawman. I never claimed they did. I would claim that by associating with terrorists like Bin Laden through their deeds, they share the guilt. Just as I think by chosing your name you align yourself with terrorists and so shoudl be treated as such. I do not think that Muslims are not born that way. Too often they choose to support terrorism and not peace.

    YOU SEE HEIGOU THERE ARE MUSLIMS OUT THERE WITH THE NAME OF ZARQAWI NOT ONLY ABU MUSAB AL-ZARQAWI WHO IS RECENTLY KILLED BY THE ALLIES. SO YOUR ARE SAYING EVERYONE WITH THE NAME ZARQAWI SHOULD BE TREATED LIKE A TERRORIST? YOU ARE INDEED AN ISLAMAPHOBE BY DRAWING SUCH BASELESS CONCLUSION AS THIS.
    I do not think that Muslims are not born that way. Too often they choose to support terrorism and not peace. JUST READ THIS STATEMENT AGAIN, I CLAIM THAT WESTEN WORLD CLAIMS EVERY MUSLIM IS BORN A TERRORIST, AND HEIGOU DOES NOT THINK THAT MUSLIMS ARE NOT BORN AS TERRORIST WHICH ALSO MEANS HE THINKS EVERY MUSLIM IS BORN A TERRORIST. OH MY GOD A PSYCHOTIC ISLAMAPHOBE IS SEEN HERE.

    the qoute of heigou,
    Iraq did not comply with UN resolutions and failed to prove it has disarmed. In fact Saddam claimed to still have such weapons. His own generals thought he did. His fault. Perfectly reasonable and justified.

    I STILL REMEMBER WATCHING THE LAST INTERVIEW CHANNEL NEWS ASIA WITH SADDAM HUSSIN BEFORE THE IRAQI FREEDOM TOOK PLACE, UNLIKE WHAT WAS REPORTED BY CNN SADDAM NEVER CLAIM TO HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESRTUCTIONS IN WHICH HE STRESS ON, BUT MOST PEOPLE DIDN’T BELIEVE HIM, IN THE END THIS TYRANT WAS TELLING THE TRUTH. LETS USE HEIGOU’S LOGIC ON ISRAEL, THEY TOO HAVE VIOLATED UN RESULOTIONS, INVADED LEBONAN AMD EGYPT ONCE AND HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION LIKE NUCLEAR WAR HEADS, WAR ON THEM BY THE ARABS PERFECTLY RESONABLE AND JUSTIFIED.

    THE QOUTE OF HEIGOU,
    Sorry but Bashir got what? How long did he serve? Gunned down? He killed himself. Tell me again how oppressed by the West the Malaysian Azhari was? You simply prove my point – as long as they killed Christians in Ambon no one cared. They killed a few Muslim Indonesians in Bali and hit the tourist trade, the Indonesian government did care. But not much. They still haven’t executed anyone. You are simply ignoring the evidence – NATO had a huge raid in 2005 but just missed Karadzic but got his son. They have offered a huge bounty for him and put enormous pressure on his wife.

    AND YOU ARE SIMPLY TWISTING THE EVIDENCE, YES A RAID IS CONDUCTED BY NATO THEY GOT HIS SON BUT REALEASED HIM 10 DAYS LATER AND PRESSURE HIS FAMILY BUT NATO TOOK 6 YEARS TO ORGANIZE A PATHETIC ATTEMP THAT MEANT TO FAIL, IT TOOK THE ALLIES LESS THAN 3 MONTHS TO INVADE AFGHANISTAN AND DESTROY AL -QAEDA AND THE TALIBAN. SEE THE DIFFRENCE ON SWIFTNESS OF ACTION. AMBON WAS A RELIGIOUS RIOT NOT CAUSED BY THE INDONESIAN GOVERMENT BUT BY CHRISTIAN TERRORIST (RECENTLY EXECUTED) WHO STARED THE RIOT BY KILLING MUSLIMS AND BURNING THE AMBON MOSQUE, CHRISTIAN ALL OVER THE WORLD KEPT QUIET INITIALLY WHEN THE RIOT STARTED BECAUSE MORE MUSLIMS WERE BEING KILLED AND DRIVEN OFF THIER HOMES, ONLY WHEN SWIFT MUSLIM RETIALION OCCURED, AND THE CHRISTIAN TERRORIST BEING COUNTER MASSACRED IT BECAME A CHRISTIAN CRISIS. WHAT ABOUT THE MASSACRE DONE BY CHRISTIAN DAYAK’S OF KALIMANTAN WHO DECAPITATED THOUSANDS OF MUSLIM MADURANESE, WHY DIDN’T YOU MENTION THIS ? WHY, YOU DIDN’T THINK CHRISTIAN’S COULD CUT OFF HEADS OF LITTLE CHILDREN ? BUT OF COURSE IN YOUR OPINION ONLY MUSLIMS ARE CAPABLE OF VIOLENCE. LIKE YOURSELF WHO HATES ISLAM BASED ON PSYCHOTIC ILLUSIONS, THEY ARE MUSLIMS EXTREMIST WHO ARE EQUALLY PSYCHOTIC LIKE YOU, WHO THINKS THEY CAN FIND SALVATION AND GET BACK AT THE ALLIES BY KILLING INNOCENT ALLIED NATION CIVILIANS.

    THE QOUTE OF HEIGOU,
    There are virtually no non-Muslim terrorists left. It is actually equal to Jihad – Muslims are attacking non-Muslims wherever they can. Not the Crusades which were, anyway, entirely in self defence. This is why when Muslims were weak and ruled by the West there was no terrorism. Now they have oil money and are stronger, they are following the Sixth Pillar.

    ONLY A PSYCHOTIC PERSON LIKE YOU WILL SAY THE CRUSADES ARE AN ACT OF SELF DEFENCE, IN 1099 CHRISTIAN CRUSADERS AFTER TAKING JERUSALEM MASSACRED ALL MUSLIM AND JEWISH POPULATION INCLUDING WOMEN AND CHILDREN WHO ARE NON-COMBATANTS, FOR SOMEONE WHO THINKS EVERY MUSLIM IS A BORN TERRORIST, IM NOT SUPRISE THIS PSYCHO CAME UP WITH THE CONCLUSION THE CRUSADES ARE SELF DEFENCE, WELL IS THAT THE LOGIC THEN ISLAMIC TERRORISM IS ALSO IN SELF DEFENCE EQUEL TO THE CRUSADE. THE SCARY LOGIC OF HEIGOU.AND THERE ARE STILL CHRISTIAN TERRORIST LEFT, RIGHT AFTER THE EXECUTION OF THE CHRISTIAN AMBON TERRORIST, TWO INNOCENT MUSLIM MEN WERE KILLED BY THE REAMNENTS OF AMBON CHRISTIAN TERRORIST MOVEMENT.

    THE FINAL QOUTE OF HEIGOU,
    Again you produce the paranoia, lies and justifications for terrorism which prove my point. Too many Muslims, probably the vast majority I expect, do not reject terrorism but embrace it.

    DID I ? NAH , ITS JUST HEIGOU’S DELLUSION BELIEVE, I NEVER DID MENTION A STATEMENT OF APPROVING THE ACTS OF TERRORISM UNLIKE HIM WHO HAS NOTED I do not think that Muslims are not born that way. Too often they choose to support terrorism and not peace.(THAT WAY= TERRORIST)

  18. Richard said on 10 October 2006:”I think you are all as bad as each other. Everybody is now, as usual, saying in effect “Yeah and then your guys did this and our guys said that” etc etc.. The give-away is that the posts are getting longer and longer. I can almost see the flecks of foam at the corners of your mouths. This is the stuff that leads firmly to World War III.”

    Really? Perhaps you might like to tell me what religion I am. I mean, I am the main poster of those long posts and if you can see the “flecks of foam” in my mouth as I say something about “our guys”, you should be able to tell me who “my” guys are.

    Richard said on 10 October 2006:”Be ashamed. All of you.”

    Pot. Kettle. You know the rest.

    Richard said on 10 October 2006:”And in my opinion there are ‘highly respected teachers’ in both Christianity and Islam who need locking up.”

    Really? Can you point out to me a few of the things that the “highly respected” leaders of any other religion apart from Islam have done lately? I’ll agree there are Christian nutcases but they are hardly “highly respected” and there are Jewish nutcases but they are fringe dwellers even within the Jewish world. But I would deny there are many nutcases in any other religion worth mentioning as this is a monotheistic thing, not a religious thing.

    Richard said on 10 October 2006:”In the meantime would somebody, without quoting out of context, be interested in a simply theological debate on the essential differences in religion?”

    Well the Pope tried that didn’t he? At some point people do things because they think their religion either tells them to or at least allows it. The religion may not even tell them to. It may even be opposed to it, but there is usually a justification in there somewhere. Take honor killings for instance. It is never enough to discuss the theology.

  19. I think you are all as bad as each other. Everybody is now, as usual, saying in effect “Yeah and then your guys did this and our guys said that” etc etc.. The give-away is that the posts are getting longer and longer. I can almost see the flecks of foam at the corners of your mouths. This is the stuff that leads firmly to World War III.

    Be ashamed. All of you.

    In my understanding, Jesus, not the crusaders, not Bush or any of the military leaders, simply says “You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.” Matthew 5.38-41

    And Buddhism has:

    “Hatred never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.” Dhammapada 1.5

    The nearest I have found to this in Islam is:

    “Let there be no injury and no requital.” (Forty Hadith of an-Nawawi 32) and
    “By the grace of Allah, you are gentle towards the people; if you had been stern and hard-hearted, they would have dispersed from round about you.” (The Holy Qur’an, Chapter 3, Verse 159)

    but I don’t believe that these are equivalent, and it looks to me as if this constitutes the essential difference between the two religions.

    Why when discussing theology does everybody insist on judging religions by deeds, not the underlying original teachings? Humans very rarely succeed in truly following the original teachings, but surely the teachings are more important than anything. And the accretions of extra meaning added by ‘highly respected teachers’ down the ages are in my view highly suspect. Even modern Buddhism has mostly drifted from the original scriptures. And in my opinion there are ‘highly respected teachers’ in both Christianity and Islam who need locking up.

    In the meantime would somebody, without quoting out of context, be interested in a simply theological debate on the essential differences in religion?

  20. al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”When a muslim like Osama ben laden, is accused of commiting act of terror like SEPT 11 causing 2819 casualties, His religion (ISLAM) and prophet is put to trial.”

    It is impossible to take anyone who uses your nom d’guerre seriously on this subject. You simply prove my point. Muslims have not rejected terrorism. In fact they are proud of it. If they weren’t you would be reprimanded for that but you haven’t and you won’t be either. All the disclaimers about Islam are meaningless because by their actions Muslims show what they really think.

    As to your comments, Islam has not been put on trial. Every Western leader has been very careful to point out that this is a war on terrorism, not on Islam, that Islam is peace-loving and that it is being distorted by a radical minority rejected by the mainstream. You cannot find a single comment by a single Western leader to the contrary. So your angry, self-righteous, victimhood is based on a lie.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”However when a non-muslims like Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic commits Genocide of more than 18,000 muslims, I do not see Christianity being blamed for it in western media neither do I see the the secular western christian nations apolagizing to the muslim world.”

    Karadic was not a Christian but a Serbian nationalist and ten seconds of searching will find plenty of Western condemnations of his ideology. Moreover ten seconds searching will find an utter and total rejection by the West of him, his ideology and what he did to the extent that the West is tracking him and all his minions down to put them on trial for their crimes. Muslims do not do the same for their own terrorists (unless they attack Muslim countries) and so the difference is clear. The West rejects such acts.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”Both men have done crime against humanity and are still at large, the only difference is Osama is currently being hunted down in great effort while Radovan even though convicted on paper in the Human rights court, efforts to capture him has been nothing but medicore.”

    That is absurd – both attempts are mediocre. And yet dozens of Serbians have been sentenced to long jail terms for what they did in Bosnia. No Muslim country has done much to help track down OBL with the minor exception of Pakistan which was forced to by threats of being bombed into the stone age. The West hates such crimes. Can you say the same about the Muslim world?

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”You see when secular christian Crusaders kill muslims who are not even involved in terrorism there is also silence, why do you have to say for more than 200,000 casualities of Iraqis during operation freedom and allied occupation ?”

    There are no Western Crusaders and to be secular and Christian is absurd. Silence? Are you living in a cave? Have you not noticed the millions of people who took to the streets in the West to protest the War in Iraq? Where have you been? If Muslims kill Muslims in Iraq I do not see that as the West’s fault – who knew they would behave like this?

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”or the torture in Abu gharib prison ?”

    Again how can you have missed the protests unless you are trying to ignore them? Where are the Muslim protests about torture in Saudi Arabia or Jordan or Egypt, or Iran or Iraq before the invasion? The police arrested a Mullah in Pakistan running his own private torture chamber just yesterday. Total silence from the Muslim world. What is it about American torture that is so much worse than Moroccan?

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”the murder and rape of 14 year girl Iraqi girl and her whole family by American troops ?”

    For which they are on trial and if found guilty will be executed. When has any Muslim country ever executed a Muslim for raping a non-Muslim? When has a Muslim soldier ever even been put on trial for such a thing? The Syrian Army raped in Lebanon. The Egyptians did in Yemen. The Pakistani police do so every day. When was anyone tried for it?

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”Islam has never and will never support the killing of innocents non – combatants even at war therefore the act of Osama is never considered JIHAD by the majority muslim world.”

    I beg to differ. Opinion poll after opinion poll shows that about half of all Muslims support what he is doing. As for Islam, well Islam is what Muslims do. When did Muslims ever fail to support the successful killing of innocent dhimmis? Can you point me to a book, by a historian or a scholar or a ruler or a novelist or anyone else, that has ever condemned the successful use of force by Muslims against non-Muslims? Whatever Islam says, far too many Muslims approve of such acts.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”The rise of Muslim terrorist is not because of Islam but rather the effects of years of denied combine violent oppresion by the more powerful Zionist regime and secular crusade nations against muslims, and out of their frustration have turn to unIslamic War strategies to counter them.”

    Again we see you apologising and excusing terrorism. This utterly contradicts what you have claimed and shows how tricky Muslims can be with words – you condemn the taking of innocent life but then claim what Bin Laden does is self-defence and justified. Bin Laden is not a Palestinian. How was he affected? He did not care about them for years and years as he lived in Afghanistan. Now he claims he does. You take that seriously? Besides I can trivially prove you wrong – the East Timorese suffered vastly more than the Palestinians. They lost a fifth of their population. The equivalent of about 2.5 million Palestinians. Since 1987 the Israelis have killed just over 6000 Palestinians. Their suffering is trivial compared to the East Timorese. And yet, not one suicide bombing, not one cafe bombing, not one beheading. On the other hand the Muslims of Indonesia are not oppressed and yet too many of them rape Chinese women, behead school girls, blow up night clubs in Bali and so on. Tell me how the Indonesians are oppressed by the Balinese. What do these cases all have in common: on the one hand Muslims commit acts of terrorism whether or not they are “oppressed”, and on other, non-Muslims do not even though they are vastly more oppressed than the Palestinians. Draw your own conclusion.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”Before asking muslims world to reform, stop oppressing muslims first. After “freeing” Iraq, the secular christian crusade have began discussing to impose sactions against Iran while Israel is allowed to have as much nuclear warheads and kill and destroy muslim lands. The so call killers are end product of western cruelty. Let me ask you question Heigou, if your whole family is being massacred by invading armies can you still be a wussie and talk about world peace ? I wont be suprise you would ended up being the so call “killer” you despise.”

    The West is not oppressing Muslims. Muslims oppress other Muslims. Indeed the less the West has oppressed Muslims, the more terrorism. There was no terrorism in 1920 when most Muslims were ruled by the West. There is now when virtually none are. Israel does not kill and destroy. It is a moderate and sensible country. It also has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Iranians are dangerous and have. They have to obey their own freely chosen legal obligations. When was Bin Laden’s family massacred by anyone? Or your hero Zarqawi’s? The Bin Ladens grew rich off the West. The East Timorese died in huge numbers but their response was civilised. They are also independent now. Can’t think why.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”Please don’t apply the concept christinity’s original sin here, just because some muslims are suspected of Sept 11, it does not mean every muslim or muslimah born on this planet carries the burden of responsibility of being a terrorist until appolagizing to the west.”

    Strawman. I never claimed they did. I would claim that by associating with terrorists like Bin Laden through their deeds, they share the guilt. Just as I think by chosing your name you align yourself with terrorists and so shoudl be treated as such. I do not think that Muslims are not born that way. Too often they choose to support terrorism and not peace.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”Now I understand why muslim casualy means little, all muslims have been branded as terrorist until proven otherwise.”

    Since when? The West has been extremely careful to do no such thing. They will not even allow profiling in airports. We are, after all, civilised. We do not attack mosques and gun down Muslimas because a Imam has said something we do not like.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”Where is the point that support the action of military action ?”

    Iraq did not comply with UN resolutions and failed to prove it has disarmed. In fact Saddam claimed to still have such weapons. His own generals thought he did. His fault. Perfectly reasonable and justified.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”The fact of the west has no “partner for peace” is bullshit, many muslims countries have responded and many suspected militants had been nabbed or killed in shootout between local security forces.”

    Well no they have not. Those that have radicals they were already fighting, still fight them. Those that were not, are not unless they are forced to by the Americans. As Pakistan showed by its truce with al-Qaeda in Waziristan.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”In Indonesia, Dr. Azhari the man that lead the bali bombings have been gunned down by Indonesian police while his accomplice Mat Top is now on the run and also being hunted down. I don’t see the CIA or Mi-6 hunting down Radovan Karadzic even though he is war criminal fugitive.”

    Sorry but Bashir got what? How long did he serve? Gunned down? He killed himself. Tell me again how oppressed by the West the Malaysian Azhari was? You simply prove my point – as long as they killed Christians in Ambon no one cared. They killed a few Muslim Indonesians in Bali and hit the tourist trade, the Indonesian government did care. But not much. They still haven’t executed anyone. You are simply ignoring the evidence – NATO had a huge raid in 2005 but just missed Karadzic but got his son. They have offered a huge bounty for him and put enormous pressure on his wife.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”The western war on terror is equal to the Crusades where every terrorist are actually muslims and non-muslim terrorist espeacially christian ones walks away.”

    There are virtually no non-Muslim terrorists left. It is actually equal to Jihad – Muslims are attacking non-Muslims wherever they can. Not the Crusades which were, anyway, entirely in self defence. This is why when Muslims were weak and ruled by the West there was no terrorism. Now they have oil money and are stronger, they are following the Sixth Pillar.

    al-zarqawi said on 7 October 2006:”Fighting against invasion and oppresion in the battlefield is not terrorism but an act of justice and self defence, for persecution is worse than slaughter.”

    Again you produce the paranoia, lies and justifications for terrorism which prove my point. Too many Muslims, probably the vast majority I expect, do not reject terrorism but embrace it.

  21. In the name of Allah most gracious, most merciful.

    The qoute of HeiGou,

    Actually they have not. It is true that in the wake of 9-11 a lot of Muslim leaders rushed to say “this is not Islam, Islam is the religion os peace” but that was just in the wake of the attack. You can see what might have been going through their minds by Muhammed Atta’s father who denied that his son could possibily have taken part in the attack until the heat was off and then he said that he wished he had more sons who could do the same. When Muslims kill other Muslims, Muslims protest. When they kill kafirs there is a noticable silence. When Muslims do “condemn” terror they usually are engaging in half-truths and deception – they’ll blame the West, they’ll deny it was Muslims and they will hide behind clever words like “innocent”. You can see what Muslims really think from people like Qaradawi who says suicide bombings in Israel are not only permitted but fard.

    MY response,
    When a muslim like Osama ben laden, is accused of commiting act of terror like SEPT 11 causing 2819 casualties, His religion (ISLAM) and prophet is put to trial. However when a non-muslims like Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic commits Genocide of more than 18,000 muslims, I do not see Christianity being blamed for it in western media neither do I see the the secular western christian nations apolagizing to the muslim world. Both men have done crime against humanity and are still at large, the only difference is Osama is currently being hunted down in great effort while Radovan even though convicted on paper in the Human rights court, efforts to capture him has been nothing but medicore. You see when secular christian Crusaders kill muslims who are not even involved in terrorism there is also silence, why do you have to say for more than 200,000 casualities of Iraqis during operation freedom and allied occupation ? or the torture in Abu gharib prison ? the murder and rape of 14 year girl Iraqi girl and her whole family by American troops ? Islam has never and will never support the killing of innocents non – combatants even at war therefore the act of Osama is never considered JIHAD by the majority muslim world. The rise of Muslim terrorist is not because of Islam but rather the effects of years of denied combine violent oppresion by the more powerful Zionist regime and secular crusade nations against muslims, and out of their frustration have turn to unIslamic War strategies to counter them.

    The qoute of HeiGou,

    Change. Action. Anything. Muslim societies produced and are still producing these killers. Not Western ones. I would like to see some thought as to why that is and some serious reform to prevent it happening again.

    My response,
    Before asking muslims world to reform, stop oppressing muslims first. After “freeing” Iraq, the secular christian crusade have began discussing to impose sactions against Iran while Israel is allowed to have as much nuclear warheads and kill and destroy muslim lands. The so call killers are end product of western cruelty. Let me ask you question Heigou, if your whole family is being massacred by invading armies can you still be a wussie and talk about world peace ? I wont be suprise you would ended up being the so call “killer” you despise.

    The qoute of HeiGou,
    When has any Muslim (a) offered an apology or (b) been coerced into doing so? No doubt that last bit is true but then as there is no other way of dealing with the vast majority of Muslims – there being no apology, no co-operation, no change and no reform – military action is the only option the West has. As there is no “partner for peace” on the Muslim side, what other options does the West have?

    Please don’t apply the concept christinity’s original sin here, just because some muslims are suspected of Sept 11, it does not mean every muslim or muslimah born on this planet carries the burden of responsibility of being a terrorist until appolagizing to the west. Now I understand why muslim casualy means little, all muslims have been branded as terrorist until proven otherwise. So tell me Heigou after the Allies ravaged Iraq, where is the weapon of mass destruction ? The link between al-qaeda and Iraqi goverment ? Where is the point that support the action of military action ? The fact of the west has no “partner for peace” is bullshit, many muslims countries have responded and many suspected militants had been nabbed or killed in shootout between local security forces. In
    Indonesia, Dr. Azhari the man that lead the bali bombings have been gunned down by Indonesian police while his accomplice Mat Top is now on the run and also being hunted down. I don’t see the CIA or Mi-6 hunting down Radovan Karadzic even though he is war criminal fugitive.

    The western war on terror is equal to the Crusades where every terrorist are actually muslims and non-muslim terrorist espeacially christian ones walks away. Its just a different name but its the same game as the crusades, and the zionis and secular crusader nations are out to clense the earth from muslims through genocide and appostasy just as how they cleanse Jerusalem in 1099. The signs are there, at this age we have an anti-islamic Pope and Crusader American President. Unite my muslims brothers and sisters regardless of race, remember Salahuddin before facing the crusades battle with both extreme and liberal muslims, only then he could unite muslims in a just war fought with under proper Islamic ways, only then Allah gave victory to Islam. Nobody wants war, but looking at the current American Foreign policy of Islamophobia, world peace is becoming more of a fairy tale rather then reality. Fighting against invasion and oppresion in the battlefield is not terrorism but an act of justice and self defence, for persecution is worse than slaughter.

  22. John said on 4 October 2006:Matthew 5:17:
    “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.”

    Jesus is a God, according to Bible itself. So we could also say that the verses in OT are nothing but the “guidelines” given by Jesus. Christians have no way out of this mess!”

    Actually they trivially do. Jesus does not say, after all, He has come to enforce the letter of the law. He says He has come to “fulfil” the law which is usually interpreted as replacing the strict, but morally empty, letter of the law, with its true internal meaning. So He does not stone the woman but says to her “Go and sin no more”.

    Ten seconds talking to a Christian or three minutes reading any Christian literature would have told you this.

  23. John, if I follow you, your argument is that

    a) The Old Testament contains the words of the prophets, which sometimes seem violent
    b) Jesus says he is here to fulfil the prophecies of the prophets
    c) Jesus is God
    d) Therefore Jesus as God is endorsing the violence of the Old Testament.

    First I don’t see why fulfilling the prophecies involves endorsing all the violence of the Old Testament.

    Secondly, different sects of Christianity vary from those who believe that every single word in the Old and New Testaments are literally the revealed word of God, to those who believe that they are written by men, and were chosen from many other similar documents by the Emperor Constantine to satisfy the often political aspirations of rival religious protagonists at the council of Nicea in the year 325. To me that second view is more logical.

    But of course there are Christian fundamentalists who say that as God wrote the Old Testament, and it seems to condone violence, and God as Jesus ‘fulfilled’ the prophets, violence must be OK. (I wonder who actually told them that God wrote it, and how did that person know?)

    But if as a rational human you read Gospels as an account of the life and teachings of Jesus you do most emphatically NOT see violence ever. It is incompatible with the teachings, which is what makes the example of Jesus special.

    Your sentence “Christians have no way out of this mess” seems out of place. In my opinion a good Christian (which I am not, and despite their protestations I believe that Bush and Blair are not) should a) Love his fellow man, b) if he is attacked, not seek revenge, c) do his best to live a good life. To which mess do you refer? The Middle East? America’s meddling with things they don’t understand? The aftermath of the British Empire? The existence of Israel? Seems to me that sustained non-violence might actually be worth trying! It worked for Mahatama Ghandi! It might even be working for the IRA!

    In conclusion, you said ‘Jesus is a God’. If the text you refer to is Psalm 46, v.5 “Be still then, and know that I am God” then Buddhists have a completely different interpretation anyway! Which only goes to show that you can argue a multiplicity of things from a single short text.

  24. Hi Richard! Here is my reply!

    >> In fact nowhere in the gospels will you find Jesus asking people to kill people or even to be violent: in fact that is totally against Christian teaching.

    Matthew 5:17:
    Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.

    Jesus is a God, according to Bible itself. So we could also say that the verses in OT are nothing but the “guidelines” given by Jesus. Christians have no way out of this mess!

  25. John quoted St Luke 19 v27 where Jesus says: “But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them–bring them here and kill them in front of me.” I was so surprised by this that I looked up the reference. The quote is actually a line in a ‘parable’ (teaching story) told by Jesus, and Jesus is not asking for people to be killed at all. In fact nowhere in the gospels will you find Jesus asking people to kill people or even to be violent: in fact that is totally against Christian teaching – despite the actions of many so-called Christians through the ages.

    Rib says that Jesus “went mentle in the temple” (sic), but there is no evidence or tradition that he physically hurt anyone – just their commercial arrangements which he felt were out of place in the temple.

    I am not a Christian, Muslim, Sikh, Buddhist, Hindu, or anything (my wife is Buddhist) but I believe that the traditional interpretations of Jesus’ teachings are valuable. So much so that I have regularly told my children that if they can’t decide the correct course of action at any time they should try to ‘think what Jesus would have done’. ‘What the Buddha would have done’ would give an almost identical result. I would however be most reluctant to advise them to ‘think what the Prophet would have done’, as I don’t believe I could guarantee that the results would be non-violent. I would welcome a reply to this post as I am genuinely interested in others opinions.

  26. Yusuf said on 29 September 2006:”Quite frankly, the vast majority of Muslims have indeed condemned the extreme minorities time and time again.”

    Actually they have not. It is true that in the wake of 9-11 a lot of Muslim leaders rushed to say “this is not Islam, Islam is the religion os peace” but that was just in the wake of the attack. You can see what might have been going through their minds by Muhammed Atta’s father who denied that his son could possibily have taken part in the attack until the heat was off and then he said that he wished he had more sons who could do the same. When Muslims kill other Muslims, Muslims protest. When they kill kafirs there is a noticable silence. When Muslims do “condemn” terror they usually are engaging in half-truths and deception – they’ll blame the West, they’ll deny it was Muslims and they will hide behind clever words like “innocent”. You can see what Muslims really think from people like Qaradawi who says suicide bombings in Israel are not only permitted but fard.

    Yusuf said on 29 September 2006:”What more, I ask, is expected from us?”

    Change. Action. Anything. Muslim societies produced and are still producing these killers. Not Western ones. I would like to see some thought as to why that is and some serious reform to prevent it happening again.

    Yusuf said on 29 September 2006:”In contrast to the way of Westerners it is the Muslims who are ceaselessly coerced to offer apologies for the actions of a mere few, are they not? Furthermore, if my homeland was being bombarded by Americans and their allies, trust me, the last thing on my mind would be an apology.”

    When has any Muslim (a) offered an apology or (b) been coerced into doing so? No doubt that last bit is true but then as there is no other way of dealing with the vast majority of Muslims – there being no apology, no co-operation, no change and no reform – military action is the only option the West has. As there is no “partner for peace” on the Muslim side, what other options does the West have?

    Yusuf said on 29 September 2006:”What frightens us Muslims mostly is the fact that almost every Westerner has become hypnotized by our fear-mongering media that offers nothing but plain hyperbole. The average laity simply tune in to CNN on a regular basis ending up literally brainwashed by the repeatedly over-exaggerated reports and (trite) words they see and hear. My advice: a balanced approach is always a great idea.”

    And yet the Westerm media goes overboard to be sensitive to Muslims and Islam. Your statement is not only not true, it comes from a completely different planet. Hyperbole? When has a Western media outlet ever said anything other than “Islam is the religion of peace”? When has CNN ever said anything other than terrorism is a work of a small minority of radicals who do not represent Islam? Compare this with the way that Judaism or Christianity is presented on any Arab media outlet. Take this gem from Dubai TV

    Ramadhan Al-Faytouri: I am the guardian of my sister. … If whoever infected this girl wanted to kill her, he would have killed her with poison. But their purpose was to spread this plague in this city and this people. Our enemy is fighting us. In Palestine, it is striking our children with missiles, in Iraq, it uses destruction, in Egypt, it uses cancer, and in Libya it uses the AIDS virus. Our enemy does not sleep, but I am sad to say that we do. The war against Islam continues, as was evident in the recent publications that mocked the Prophet Muhammad. This is a war, just as they wanted it to be.”

    Where has a Western TV outlet ever accused Muslims of trying to murder Westerners through cancer or AIDS?

    Yusuf said on 29 September 2006:”(BTW, excellent article by Karen Armstrong)”

    Actually it was utterly awful. As this snippet of TV shows the real hatred is in the Muslim world, not the West. We cannot afford Muslim bigotry anymore, it kills, and Ms Armstrong ought to know better.

  27. jmcd,

    Your presumptions deceive you, friend.

    Quite frankly, the vast majority of Muslims have indeed condemned the extreme minorities time and time again. What more, I ask, is expected from us? In contrast to the way of Westerners it is the Muslims who are ceaselessly coerced to offer apologies for the actions of a mere few, are they not? Furthermore, if my homeland was being bombarded by Americans and their allies, trust me, the last thing on my mind would be an apology.

    What frightens us Muslims mostly is the fact that almost every Westerner has become hypnotized by our fear-mongering media that offers nothing but plain hyperbole. The average laity simply tune in to CNN on a regular basis ending up literally brainwashed by the repeatedly over-exaggerated reports and (trite) words they see and hear. My advice: a balanced approach is always a great idea.

    (BTW, excellent article by Karen Armstrong)

  28. >> “Jesus had told his followers to love their enemies, not to exterminate them. ”
    Then What about this? :) >>
    “He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them–bring them here and kill them in front of me.’ After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. ( Luke 19:26-28)”

  29. Essentially what the West sees is an apparently small band of Islamic extremists trying to wage a holy war against everyone who is not of their mind set and the rest; presumably the vast majority of the Muslim community doing and saying little against them. Gradually people begin to wonder if Islam is indeed a religion of peace where is the outrage at all of the murder in the name of God.

  30. “Jesus had told his followers to love their enemies, not to exterminate them. ”

    only when he was in a weak position.his terrorist parables agaisnt the pharises are worser than getting punched in the face.he went mentle in the temple.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *