RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Islam: a religion of peace?

Quote:

---

magicjay38 said:

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
Where are Christians rioting against Muslims?

---

Baghdad, Fallujah, etc.....

---

Sure, JQ, surrrre...

Quote:

---

Captain Sammitch said:

Quote:

---

magicjay38 said:

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
Where are Christians rioting against Muslims?

---

Baghdad, Fallujah, etc.....

---

Sure, JQ, surrrre...

---

Quote:

---

r3x29yz4a said:

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
Where are Christians rioting against Muslims?

---

Christians are running things in these countries and don't need to riot, they just egg them on.
Look at this story (that I think you posted) about the school where Muslims asked for their religious holidays too and their was a big backlash. Why can't they have their holidays counted if Easter and Christmas are.

Lets be honest here, the Jews are the only one of the big three that aren't assholes.

---

Quote:

---

Al-Zarqawi's Jordan Family Renounces Him
By JAMAL HALABY, Associated Press Writer 18 minutes ago

AMMAN, Jordan - Family members of Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi renounced the terrorist leader Sunday after his al-Qaida in Iraq group claimed responsibility for the Nov. 9 suicide attacks on three Amman hotels that killed 59 people.

The family of al-Zarqawi, whose real name is Ahmed Fadheel Nazzal al-Khalayleh, reiterated their strong allegiance to Jordan's King Abdullah II in half-page advertisements in the kingdom's three main newspapers. Al-Zarqawi threatened to kill the king in an audiotape released Friday.

"A Jordanian doesn't stab himself with his own spear," said the statement by 57 members of the al-Khalayleh family, including al-Zarqawi's brother and cousin. "We sever links with him until doomsday."

The statement is a serious blow to al-Zarqawi, who no longer will enjoy the protection of his tribe and whose family members may seek to kill him.

"As we pledge to maintain homage to your throne and to our precious Jordan ... we denounce in the clearest terms all the terrorist actions claimed by the so-called Ahmed Fadheel Nazzal al-Khalayleh, who calls himself Abu Musab al-Zarqawi," the family members said.

"We announce, and all the people are our witnesses, that we — the sons of the al-Khalayleh tribe — are innocent of him and all that emanates from him, whether action, assertion or decision."

The statement said anyone who carried out such violence in the kingdom does not enjoy its protection.

The al-Khalayleh tribe is a branch of the Bani Hassan, one of the area's largest and most prominent Bedouin tribes, which help form the bedrock of support for the royal family's Hashemite dynasty.

Relatives hold senior posts in the army and other government departments.

Al-Zarqawi often boasted of his family's influence when he was jailed in his native Jordan, said Yousef al-Rababaah, an ex-convict who shared al-Zarqawi's cellblock for four years until both were freed under a royal amnesty in 1999.

"Prison wardens and other prisoners feared him because of his family connections and influence," he told The Associated Press recently.

The family statement follows a rally Friday by dozens of angry al-Khalayleh tribe members, who also denounced al-Zarqawi.

The terrorist leader took his name from the city of Zarqa, 17 miles northeast of Amman.

"If my son was a terrorist, I wouldn't hesitate to kill him," family member Mousa al-Khalayleh said during Friday's rally, claiming he spoke on behalf of the tribe. "This is the slogan raised by the tribe as of this moment."

Sunday's message was similar to one sent last year by some members of al-Zarqawi's clan to Abdullah. That message, which contained fewer signatories, severed links with the terrorist for claiming a failed plot in April 2004 that targeted the Amman headquarters of Jordan's intelligence agency, the prime minister's office and the U.S. Embassy.

Officials have said thousands of people would have been killed had the attacks been carried out.

Al-Zarqawi has claimed responsibility for several terrorist attacks in Jordan and was sentenced to death in absentia for planning a conspiracy that led to the 2002 killing of U.S. aid worker Laurence Foley.

He also leads a campaign of bombings and kidnappings in Iraq, and the United States has offered $25 million for information leading to his capture.

---

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:

Then why are the Muslims so determined to kill them too or Hindu's for that matter? Yea, we should just let the seularists like you, Mao and Stallin take over then we'll all have peace.

---

Quote:

---

Darknight613 said:
Those who claim that Muslims don't condemn other Muslims for terrorist actions may find this interesting.

---

[1]it doesn't happen enough and
[2] a lot of the religions' leaders (though not all) seem to, at best, fail to condemn the violence or, at worst, actively encourage it.

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
I don't anyone has said it never happens, only that[

[1]it doesn't happen enough
[2] a lot of the religions' leaders (though not all) seem to, at best, fail to condemn the violence or, at worst, actively encourage it.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
I don't anyone has said it never happens, only that

[1]it doesn't happen enough and
[2] a lot of the religions' leaders (though not all) seem to, at best, fail to condemn the violence or, at worst, actively encourage it.

---

“This is a priority for us and the secretary-general and it’s unfortunate that it’s come down to some members of the [Organization of the Islamic Conference] being so obstructionist, trying to carve out what’s considered terrorism,” Benjamin Chang, deputy spokesman for the U.S. Mission, said yesterday. “We think that it’s unfortunate that we’re at this stage of things this long after we rhetorically made all these commitments in September.”

On Tuesday, committee members agreed without a vote to postpone work on the contentious language, while denouncing as “unjustifiable” acts of terror designed to provoke fear in the general public. They also agreed that all states should prevent terrorist acts and prosecute perpetrators.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in a statement that he is “disappointed” with the lack of action and indicated that he would soon meet with key players to try to resolve their differences.

Every nation agrees that terrorism is wrong, but many Arab and Islamic governments insist that an exception must be made for those fighting colonial domination or foreign occupation.

Among the groups that might fit that description: Islamic Jihad and Hamas in the West Bank, the insurgents of Iraq, and secessionist movements in Chechnya, Kashmir, the Philippines, Indonesia and Northern Ireland, among many others.

MULTAN, Pakistan - Nazir Ahmed appears calm and unrepentant as he recounts how he slit the throats of his three young daughters and their 25-year old stepsister to salvage his family’s “honor” — a crime that shocked Pakistan.

The 40-year old laborer, speaking to The Associated Press in police detention as he was being shifted to prison, confessed to just one regret — that he didn’t murder the stepsister’s alleged lover too.

Hundreds of girls and women are murdered by male relatives each year in this conservative Islamic nation, and rights groups said Wednesday such “honor killings” will only stop when authorities get serious about punishing perpetrators.

The independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said that in more than half of such cases that make it to court, most end with cash settlements paid by relatives to the victims’ families, although under a law passed last year, the minimum penalty is 10 years, the maximum death by hanging.

Ahmed’s killing spree — witnessed by his wife Rehmat Bibi as she cradled their 3 month-old baby son — happened Friday night at their home in the cotton-growing village of Gago Mandi in eastern Punjab province.

It is the latest of more than 260 such honor killings documented by the rights commission, mostly from media reports, during the first 11 months of 2005.

Bibi recounted how she was woken by a shriek as Ahmed put his hand to the mouth of his stepdaughter Muqadas and cut her throat with a machete. Bibi looked helplessly on from the corner of the room as he then killed the three girls — Bano, 8, Sumaira, 7, and Humaira, 4 — pausing between the slayings to brandish the bloodstained knife at his wife, warning her not to intervene or raise alarm.

“I was shivering with fear. I did not know how to save my daughters,” Bibi, sobbing, told AP by phone from the village. “I begged my husband to spare my daughters but he said, ‘If you make a noise, I will kill you.’”

“The whole night the bodies of my daughters lay in front of me,” she said.

A poll carried out in the Palestinian Authority shows 65% support for Al Qaeda terror attacks on the United States and European countries - the biggest donors to the PA. The poll comes at a time when US and European funding of the Palestinian Authority is at an all-time high.

With elections due to be held next month and the Hamas terror group gaining significantly in municipal elections and polls, the survey further illustrates the desire of a majority of PA Arabs to establish an Islamic state, similar to Iran. A whopping 79.9% of Palestinians would like the PA to follow Shari’a - Islamic religious law. Included in the figure are 11.3% of the respondents, who would like to see Shari’a supplemented by the laws of a PA Legislature.

“What is striking is the willingness of Palestinians to turn against even the Western countries upon whom they are so totally dependent in order to progress,” said Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) Director Itamar Marcus. “The poll underscores what PMW has been documenting for years - the profoundly negative impact hate education has had on PA society ... Palestinians are not in direct conflict with the US, and certainly have counted on the Europeans as active allies. And yet an overwhelming majority desire to see Europeans and Americans killed by a religion-based terror organization.”

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
In a poll taken after the Gaza disengagement, 65% of Palestinians strongly supported Al Qaeda terror attacks in the US and Europe.

---

A Muslim who becomes a naturalized American citizen is literally millions of times more likely to plot terrorist acts against his fellow citizens than a member of any other religious creed or political ideology (Islam is both). It is not possible to wage a meaningful “Global War on Terrorism” without considering the legal, moral, and pragmatic implications of this problem.

First, the facts. Muslims account for up to one percent of the population of the United States, in contrast to Western Europe where their share of the population is up to ten times greater. They like to pretend otherwise, and groups such as the Islamic Society of North America, the Muslim Student Association, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the American Muslim Council (AMC), and the Harvard Islamic Society routinely assert that there are between 4.5 and 9 million Muslims in the United States. It is remarkable that these sources do not provide any empirically verifiable basis for their figures.

Impartial studies currently place the number of Muslims at between 2 and 3 million. The American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) conducted by the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY) polled more than 50,000 people in 2001 and found the total American Muslim population to be 1.8 million. The University of Chicago’s Tom W. Smith reached a similar figure

It is estimated that up to two-thirds of that group are foreign-born immigrants, and about one half are naturalized American citizens. In other words, about one-half of one percent of the country’s overall population are foreign-born Muslims who are now naturalized U.S. citizens.

As U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials are well aware (and some readily admit off-the-record), the attitudes of these people tend to change once their status in America is secure. As visa applicants or permanent residents they refrain from statements and acts that may make them excludable under current laws. But as soon as they gain citizenship, some among them are quick to rediscover the virtues of sharia and jihad.

“We must never forget . . . that as Muslims, we are obligated to desire, and when possible to participate in, the overthrow of any non-Islamic government—anywhere in the world – in order to replace it by an Islamic one,” the speaker concluded his remarks. The venue was a mosque, not in Rawalpindi or Jeddah but in San Francisco. When a recent convert noted that if Muslims are obligated to overthrow the U.S. government then accepting Islam was tantamount to an act of political treason, the lecturer responded matter-of-factly, “Yes, that’s true.”

He was right both technically and substantively. A breach of allegiance to the United States by naturalized Muslims is not a rarity, it is an integral part of the Muslim-American experience. It is an inherent dilemma for many; it leads the serious few to give aid and comfort to the enemy. The problem will be solved only if and when Islamic activism is treated as grounds for the loss of acquired U.S. citizenship and deportation. The citizenship of any naturalized American who actively supports or preaches jihad, inequality of “infidels,” the establishment of the Shari’a law, etc., should be revoked, and that person promptly deported to the country of origin.

For a Muslim to declare all of the above in good faith, and especially that he accepts the Constitution of the United States as the source of his highest loyalty, is an act of brazen apostasy par excellence, and apostasy is punishable by death under the Islamic law. The sharia, to a Muslim, is not an addition to the “secular” legal code with which it coexists with “the Constitution and laws of the United States of America”; it is the only true code, the only basis of obligation. To be legitimate, all political power therefore must rest exclusively with those who enjoy Allah’s authority on the basis of his revealed will. In America that is not the case and its government is therefore illegitimate.

It is equally sacrilegious for a Muslim to swear to “support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” That vow, if it means anything substantial, means that he would be prepared to shoot a fellow Muslim, or denounce him to the authorities, in defense of his adopted homeland. That this is not how many if not most naturalized Muslims see it is a matter of record.

So how can a self-avowedly devout Muslim take the oath of American citizenship, and expect the rest of us to believe that it was done in good faith and not only in order to get that coveted passport? A devout Muslim can do it only if in taking the oath he is practicing taqiyya, the art of dissimulation that was inaugurated by Muhammad to help destabilize and undermine non-Muslim communities almost ripe for a touch of old-fashioned Jihad. Or else he may take it because he is not devout and may be confused, in other case if he is not a very good Muslim at all; but in that case there is the ever-present danger that at some point in the future he or his American-born offspring will rediscover their roots. The consequences of such awakening for the rest of us are invariably perilous.

Quote:

---

magicjay said:
Okay, most of the USA soldiers are Xtian. If it makes you feel better call them Americans. The question is which would feel better; having your face burned off by a Muslim 'terrorist' or an American pilot?

---

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:
OK, so what's your solution? I read all this evidence presented herein that says Islam is not a religion of peace.

OK, so what do you propose to do about it?

---

Quote:

---

Pariah said:

I'd like to comment on this statement by saying that I was at the recruiter's office a few weeks ago.

---

Quote:

---

Jim Jackson said:
OK, so what's your solution? I read all this evidence presented herein that says Islam is not a religion of peace.

OK, so what do you propose to do about it?

---

Quote:

---

A breach of allegiance to the United States by naturalized Muslims is not a rarity, it is an integral part of the Muslim-American experience. It is an inherent dilemma for many; it leads the serious few to give aid and comfort to the enemy. The problem will be solved only if and when Islamic activism is treated as grounds for the loss of acquired U.S. citizenship and deportation. The citizenship of any naturalized American who actively supports or preaches jihad, [who preaches the ] inequality of “infidels,” [who advocates] the establishment of the Shari’a law, etc., should be revoked, and that person promptly deported to the country of origin.

---

The head Islamic chaplain for the city jail system was suspended yesterday after he claimed Muslims were being tortured in Manhattan lock-ups, and declared that the "greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House."

Mayor Bloomberg and City Correction Commissioner Martin Horn put Abdul-Jalil on paid administrative leave from his $76,602-a-year job, pending the outcome of an investigation into his inflammatory remarks.

Last April, a counterterrorism organization, the Investigative Project, secretly recorded two speeches Abdul-Jalil gave at a conference sponsored by the Muslim Students Association in Tucson, Ariz.

In remarks to two panels at the conference, Abdul-Jalil alleged that Muslims jailed after the 9/11 attacks were being "tortured" in the Manhattan Correctional Center, that "the greatest terrorists in world occupy the White House" and that Muslims should not allow "Zionists of the media to dictate what Islam is to us."

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Rep. Peter King (R-L.I.) and several other New York area politicians called for Abdul-Jalil to be axed.

"A person with those views should not be allowed to serve in any government agency," King said.

Like many news junkies, I've noticed that stories putting Muslims in a bad light tend to be sketchy and underreported. A minor example is this comment by the head Muslim chaplain of New York City's prisons: "The greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House." In Manhattan, remarks like that are nearly as conventional as talk about the weather, so the controversy was fairly small.

It might have been larger if the media had shown any interest in other points the imam made. For instance that Muslim prisoners are being tortured in Manhattan, and that Muslims must be "hard against the kaffir" (i.e., nasty to infidels), which presumably city employees are not paid to recommend. (By the way, why are clergymen city employees at all?)

A much bigger example is the misleadingly low-key reporting of the Ilan Halimi murder in Paris. We now know that Halimi was killed as a classic expression of Jew hatred. But with so much evasiveness and misdirection by police, government and press, it took a month to get that fact clearly on the table. Halimi, a cell phone salesman, was kidnapped and held for ransom by a mostly Muslim gang. He was horrifically tortured for three weeks, then slain. From time to time, neighbors had come to watch the torture or to participate in it. Nobody called the gendarmes.

At first the government and the press presented this story as a straightforward kidnapping for ransom. A spokesman said Jewishness may have played a role simply because the kidnappers thought Jews were rich. AP and UPI, in feeds to the United States, barely mentioned the possibility of anti-Semitism. After arrests were made, the BBC worked hard to avoid using the word "Muslim," though verses from the Quran were recited during the torture.

The Los Angeles Times account of Feb. 28 shows how hard candor can be. It reported that the gang made hundreds of abusive phone calls to Jews and had systematically tried to kidnap Jews. But the reporters wrote this: "Rather than a premeditated anti-Semitic murder, it seems a more complex product of criminality and dysfunction in the narrow world of thug culture: a poisonous mentality that designates Jews as enemies along with other faces of 'outsiders.'"

Oh, please. If whites had tortured and killed a black man, I doubt that reporters would be carrying on about how complex and unpremeditated it all was. They would just say it was a lynching.

In an excellent article last week, Colin Nickerson of The Boston Globe said the crime was being attributed to a "predominantly Muslim youth gang" notorious for "virulent anti-Semitism." The gang's taunting phone calls to Halimi's father were filled with anti-Semitic slurs and a rabbi had been told, "We have a Jew." The Globe said hatred of Jews is now a hallmark of what's cool in France, even among young immigrants from non-Muslim nations. Very strong article. No dancing around, just good reporting.

Governments and the media often avoid calling terrorism by its proper name. Presumably the idea is to calm the public and avoid embarrassing Muslims. It took nine months for the FBI and the government to admit that the attack on L.A. airport in 2002 was a terrorist operation. We had been told that personal reasons might explain why a pro-Palestinian gunman, who openly admitted the desire to kill civilians, would kill two people at an El Al counter.

The same verbal dance took place recently when an Iranian student rented a large van and tried to run down and kill as many students as possible in North Carolina. He said he was attempting to "avenge the deaths of Muslims around the world." But the university tried desperately to avoid the obvious T-word.

Tony Blankley wrote a Washington Times column, March 8, on the underreporting of Muslim violence. He said British politicians tell him there is increasing radical Muslim street violence, explicitly motivated by radical Islam, but not reported or characterized as such. Blankley said rioting Moroccan youths in Antwerp went on a rampage, beating up reporters and destroying cars, but police were instructed not to arrest or stop them. A database search shows little reporting on Antwerp riots.

The scary riots in Australia last December, pitting Lebanese immigrants against native whites, were well-covered. But nobody seems quite sure that we are getting the full story about other serious disturbances. From time to time the Internet carries reports of riots that don't make the newspapers, but they are mostly uncheckable.

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
Increasing Muslim Violence in Europe Is Not Being Reported

Governments and the media often avoid calling terrorism by its proper name. Presumably the idea is to calm the public and avoid embarrassing Muslims.

The scary riots in Australia last December, pitting Lebanese immigrants against native whites, were well-covered. But nobody seems quite sure that we are getting the full story about other serious disturbances. From time to time the Internet carries reports of riots that don't make the newspapers, but they are mostly uncheckable.

---

Despite the overthrow of the fundamentalist Taliban government and the presence of 22,500 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, a man who converted to Christianity is being prosecuted in Kabul, and a judge said Sunday that if convicted, he faces the death penalty.

Abdul Rahman, who is in his 40s, says he converted to Christianity 16 years ago while working as an aid worker helping Afghan refugees in Pakistan.

Relatives denounced him as a convert during a custody battle over his children, and he was arrested last month. The prosecutor says Rahman was found with a Bible.

Quote:

---

Wonder Boy said:

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
Increasing Muslim Violence in Europe Is Not Being Reported

Governments and the media often avoid calling terrorism by its proper name. Presumably the idea is to calm the public and avoid embarrassing Muslims.

The scary riots in Australia last December, pitting Lebanese immigrants against native whites, were well-covered. But nobody seems quite sure that we are getting the full story about other serious disturbances. From time to time the Internet carries reports of riots that don't make the newspapers, but they are mostly uncheckable.

---

The only reason the "scary riots in Australia" were reported was because it could be spun as 'white racist Australians' attacking 'innocent Muslims'.

Except that the 'innocent Muslims' were all too eager to lash back violently, rather than exhibit restraint and allow the Australian justice system to punish their non-Muslim attackers.
And in that lack of restaint, Muslims in Australia again demonstrated the consistent Muslim impulse for violence, and contempt for the culture and government of nations that are gracious enough to allow Muslims in their borders.

---

Quote:

---

Afghan Clerics Demand Convert Be Killed
By DANIEL COONEY, Associated Press Writer

KABUL, Afghanistan - Senior Muslim clerics demanded Thursday that an Afghan man on trial for converting from Islam to Christianity be executed, warning that if the government caves in to Western pressure and frees him, they will incite people to "pull him into pieces."

In an unusual move, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice telephoned President Hamid Karzai on Thursday seeking a "favorable resolution" of the case of Abdul Rahman. The 41-year-old former medical aid worker faces the death penalty under Afghanistan's Islamic laws for becoming a Christian.

His trial has fired passions in this conservative Muslim nation and highlighted a conflict of values between Afghanistan and its Western backers.

"Rejecting Islam is insulting God. We will not allow God to be humiliated. This man must die," said cleric Abdul Raoulf, who is considered a moderate and was jailed three times for opposing the Taliban before the hard-line regime was ousted in 2001.

The trial, which began last week, has caused an international outcry. President Bush has said he is "deeply troubled" by the case and expects the country to "honor the universal principle of freedom."

Rice spokesman Sean McCormack said she told Karzai it is important for the Afghan people to know that freedom of religion is observed in their country. But in deference to the country's sovereignty, Rice evidently did not demand specifically that the trial be halted and the defendant released.

"This is clearly an Afghan decision," McCormack said. "They are a sovereign country."

Still, Rice's direct appeal to a foreign leader in a judicial proceeding in their own country is an unusual move.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel told reporters she had received assurances from Karzai in a telephone call that Rahman would not be sentenced to death.

"I have the impression that he (Karzai) has a firm willingness" to abide by the human rights requirements, Merkel said going into pre-European Union summit talks. "I hope we will be able to resolve this."

Diplomats have said the Afghan government is searching for a way to drop the case. On Wednesday, authorities said Rahman is suspected of being mentally ill and would undergo psychological examinations to see whether he is fit to stand trial.

But three Sunni preachers and a Shiite one interviewed by The Associated Press in four of Kabul's most popular mosques said they do not believe Rahman is insane.

"He is not crazy. He went in front of the media and confessed to being a Christian," said Hamidullah, chief cleric at Haji Yacob Mosque.

"The government is scared of the international community. But the people will kill him if he is freed."

Raoulf, who is a member of the country's main Islamic organization, the Afghan Ulama Council, agreed. "The government is playing games. The people will not be fooled."

"Cut off his head!" he exclaimed, sitting in a courtyard outside Herati Mosque. "We will call on the people to pull him into pieces so there's nothing left."

He said the only way for Rahman to survive would be for him to go into exile.

But Said Mirhossain Nasri, the top cleric at Hossainia Mosque, one of the largest Shiite places of worship in Kabul, said Rahman must not be allowed to leave the country.

"If he is allowed to live in the West, then others will claim to be Christian so they can too," he said. "We must set an example. ... He must be hanged."

The clerics said they were angry with the United States and other countries for pushing for Rahman's freedom.

"We are a small country and we welcome the help the outside world is giving us. But please don't interfere in this issue," Nasri said. "We are Muslims and these are our beliefs. This is much more important to us than all the aid the world has given us."

Afghanistan's constitution is based on Shariah law, which is interpreted by many Muslims to require that any Muslim who rejects Islam be sentenced to death.

Hamidullah warned that if the government frees Rahman, "there will be an uprising" like one against Soviet occupying forces in the 1980s.

"The government will lose the support of the people," he said. "What sort of democracy would it be if the government ignored the will of all the people."

Meanwhile, human rights group Amnesty International said if Rahman has been detained solely for his religious beliefs, he would be a "prisoner of conscience."

"The charges against him should be dropped and if necessary he should be protected against any abuses within the community," the London-based group said in a statement.

Rahman is believed to have lived in Germany for nine years after converting to Christianity while working as a medical aid worker for an international Christian group helping Afghan refugees in Pakistan. He returned to Kabul in 2002.

It was not immediately clear when Rahman's trial will resume. Authorities have barred attempts by the AP to see him and he is not believed to have a lawyer.

---