<p>People like Confused are!</p>
<p>Confused, where do i begin? </p>
<p>According to you:
1. The Muslim religion if responsible for the majority of violence in the world.
2. The Muslim religion is the cause of the world's problems.
3. It would be better if all of the Muslims were gone.</p>
<p>If you substituted the word Muslim for Christian, this is probably the exact same way those who carry out the horrific attacks feel. Hmm...what does that make you?</p>
<p>As many posters have said, you can't generalize and call an entire group of people "violent." Not all Muslims are violent terrorists; in fact, nearly all of them are peaceful, respectful citizens. It's the ones that twist their religion around to fit their own agenda that get the most attention, and unfortunately, cast a bad image on the rest of the population. Those Muslims are in an extremely small minority.</p>
<p>It'd be like saying all Germans during WWII were members of the Nazi party, or that all white people are racists and owned slaves. Obviously, those statements are far from the truth.</p>
<p>To the person that said "government's bombing of desert 'monuments' that are already worthless?": A monument that you consider "worthless" could mean a lot to another group of people. While I don't know the exact monuments you are referring to, obviously these monuments have some sort of historical, cultural, and/or religious value to a group of people. Who are you to decide what what is valuable and what is not? What if, say the Vatican Church, or the Lincoln monument, was destroyed because someone thought it was "worthless"? How would you feel?</p>
<p>Uvajoe, yes, yes, and yes</p>
<p>hahaa Confused, you're one in a billion.</p>
<p>I don't recall the similar attack on Madrid getting near this AMERICAN media coverage. Any other thoughts?</p>
<p>no wonder his name is confused...</p>
<p>uvajoe--</p>
<p>I think the reason this is getting more coverage is that many Americans feel some sort of bond with the British. I know I've always seen them as our friends overseas. After all, we used to be a part of their country. In a way, they seem almost like distant relatives to many of us. I just love all those British people!</p>
<p>I think the US has closer ties to the UK than to Spain, maybe partially because with the majority of the US population being of Western European descent, many people can trace their ancestry back to Britain.</p>
<p>Edit: flipchick1127, looks like we posted pretty much the same thing at the same time :)</p>
<p>Yea, I'm not really seeking explanation, I'm just making a point about the media...</p>
<p>CDN-- Great minds think alike! :)</p>
<p>I fully agree with CDN_dancer, but I have to make a point about Islam before someone (hopefully no one) from Confused's camp does. The Muslim Holy Book does in fact say, "those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back, take them and kill them wherever you find them." (Surah 4;89) However, we should remember that, just as with the Christian religion, the Islamic masses don't actually read the scriptures because most of them can't read in the first place. Thus they do not truly represent what their holy book teaches. It is only the radical, well-informed groups in this and every other conflict in world history that take action and do whatever it is that they want to do. (The Nazis, for example). </p>
<p>I think the Western world should take full advantage of this and convince the general Muslim population that our leaders don't want trouble with them, only with the radicals (who massacre their own people, too). This isn't being emphasized enough, and it needs to be before more young, born into-the-faith Muslims are recruited by the fundamentalists to kill us "western devils" because they are made to believe that that is what we want to do to them. (But of course, people like Confused would probably ruin our every effort for peaceful coexitence by opening their genocidephilic mouth every chance they get. Not good.)</p>
<p>I think cswim06 and Sandy-owl got banned lol</p>
<p>My aunti lives in london and she's cracking jokes.</p>
<p>Hey, I didn't get banned! Lol...some of us do other things too you know :)</p>
<p>MzLover3,
I don't know how many times have I heard and corrected this argument. May be I should just write a book on this topic! (I am sure there are many already)
" Islamic masses don't actually read the scriptures because most of them can't read in the first place"
First of all, most Muslims see it a duty upon themselves to be able to read the holy scripture. Thus, it is not surprising to find many illiterate people (who can otherwise not read anything in their own language) be able to read the Quran in Arabic. How many of them go seek the meanings and understandings...I can't say. It is not uncommon for people whose first language is not Arabic to listen to tapes for meanings when they are not able to read the meanings in their own language! </p>
<p>Now, let's get to the real argument here:
"The Muslim Holy Book does in fact say, "those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back, take them and kill them wherever you find them." (Surah 4;89)"
I want to start off by saying that this is not even the verse many people use to make the argument you made. The verse you were talking about has the following meaning...taken from threee different sources:</p>
<p>YUSUFALI: They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-
PICKTHAL: They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,
SHAKIR: They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.</p>
<p>So, we are talking about "renegades," people who "turn back" or turn "back to enmity." Nowhere does it say that people who do not believe in your faith. To understand this verse, you have to have some background. Surah nisa is the 4th surah where you took this verse out of. It was revealed in medina when Muslims were starting out. They could not afford to have their own people turn their backs on them (renegades, traitors, etc). This verse was revealed to just cause fear in the hearts of those who wanted to trun back and stab their very own people. I don't see much wrong with it. Think of it this way. What about the world forces that have laws against their soldiers leaving them and joining the opposite sides?</p>
<p>Very Well Put, Sandy Owl!</p>
<p>Since we are on it, may be I should mention the verse that most people use to make teh argument you did. It is surah2 , verse 191:
"And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. "</p>
<p>Now, let's look at the verse before this one: (verse 190)
"And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits."</p>
<p>Now let's put them together:
"And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith"</p>
<p>It doesn't take a Newton to figure out that the second verse which is usually taken to believe that all non-Muslims are to be killed has some link to the first one. What is the link? The link is that the first verse tells you who they, them in the second verse are. "they, them" are not people who do not follow your faith but people who fight you. The verse doesn't even command to start the fight. If they fight, you fight. Surprisingly, it even says "don't exceed the limits." What are the limits? They are described in the hadith as not killing civilians, not burning property, trees, not killing animals, etc.</p>
<p>So, basically, that verse is taken out of context. It is amazing how people come up with their own meanings of "they, them." Who is they, them? Seriously, this argument is so inane...I am just sick of it.</p>
<p>Thanks for the information, Sandy-owl! While my knowledge of religious teachings of any sort is limited (I'm not at all religious), the Muslim religion is probably the one that I know the least about.</p>
<p>It's unfortunate that people will pick and choose verses from a holy text and twist them around/use them out of context to further their agenda. It's not only the Muslim religion; it also happens with the Christian Bible, and I assume various other religions. And the sad thing is that most people don't realize this.</p>
<p>Just a question, forgive my ignorance, but do the terms "Islam" and "Muslim" refer to the same religion?</p>
<p>Muslims are followers of Islam
Christians are followers of Christianity
Jews are followers of Judaism
Etc.</p>
<p>Ah, I see. Thank you for explaining it sarorah. :)</p>