179 replies to this topic

[RavenHawk]

This post has been moved from “Spirituality, Religion and Beliefs”.  It has morphed from the op but I think that what it has morphed into is too important to let go.  So, I’m going to set it up here.  To see prior posts, please goto http://www.unexplain...ic=224427&st=0.

psyche101, on 04 April 2012 - 01:54 AM, said:

My thanks, you have really given a person something to think about.

If anything, I do do that

Quote

May I ask you Raven if you have watched the documentary Ghosts Of Abu Ghraib and if so, may I ask your opinion of it?

I didn’t watch it when it first came out, but I did watch it this past weekend.  I just want to scream!  Even though it is filled with facts, it’s framed inside so many inaccuracies.  It is not objective, just inflammatory.  I don’t think I can spend the time to do this justice.

The film states that there were thousands in that prison.  The odds are that there will be a few deaths.  Not from anything else but just being imprisoned.  Most people can take it, a few can’t.  That is human nature.  The film opens up with an experiment on human nature, why didn’t they show mortality rates within any population?  Now there are many unanswered questions around this death.  They exploit this father’s death to sling mud.  The film intentionally implies that the treatment of the father led directly to his death.  In all honesty, that conclusion cannot be confirmed.  Only imagination can.  Why did the guard ignore the son’s pleas?  There are so many possibilities.  Maybe the father was belligerent and the treatment warranted?  The father probably appeared as a “tough old bird” and that the pleas of the son were but a rouse?  Maybe both of them were trouble makers and had done this before.  The film never tried to go into determining if that family was making explosives.

One does realize that bad things occurred to prisoners prior to the Geneva Convention?  Like 5500 years worth.  Do you think that the number of bad things drastically dropped after the GC?  The US signed the initial treaty in 1882.  Do you think that since then every POW has been treated humanely?  The fact is that we will never know because we don’t have the pictures if there ever was.  But the right answer is no.  In some instances the opponent did not observe the treaty.  Does that mean that we are bound to still observe it?  As with any treaty – no.  Should we try?  In general, yes but it would be dependent on the local situation.  I’ve said this before; the only rule in war is to win.  By any means possible.  Now after saying that, doesn’t mean rules are not observed.  If any are, it is on the battlefield, understood and controlled by the commanders.  It’s not something that is regulated by a political body and artificially imposed.  The terrorists we face today have violated the GC on several occasions so I would leave it up to the soldier in the field.  In this film they do ask the question about observing the treaty even if the terrorists are not a signatory member.  Since this film is a bit of Hollywood, if you’ve seen the movies “Rules of Engagement”, “Saving Private Ryan”, and “Band of Brothers” you see a sanitized but intellectual look at why one treats prisoners the way they do in war.  It’s not pretty.  And this is the thing; you can’t look at war through the eyes of peacetime sensibilities.  But that is what too many are trying to do.  And this is what the producers of this film are doing.

I’m not trying to make excuses for what happened, but I do think that the military usage of torture is getting a bad rap.  Now when most people think about torture, they are probably envisioning some sadistic cop beating the crap out of a kid to get a confession.  Well, the proper application of torture in a military atmosphere is not that.  Torture done properly is very effective.  Torture is meant to breakdown the defenses of mind and body.  Pain, disorientation, deprivation, and stress are just some of the means.  It is the application of these techniques over a period of days, weeks, or months.  I caught part of a WWII era training film (I think it was) that showed the Nazis trying a different kind of torture.  They didn’t try to break the body, but tried disorientation by having the interrogators build bonds with the pilots.  I wish I could find it again.

John Yoo talks about the language in Chapter 113C of the UN Conventions on Torture.  He says that the term “severe physical pain or suffering” is not well defined and that is true.  In the realm politicians, diplomats, and bureaucrats this is a vague term.  That was the problem with the UN in that it never put any teeth in its resolutions.  Then Rumsfeld provided the definition of “Illegal combatant” and you can legally throw out both documents.  The memorandum by Alberto R Gonzales of 1 Aug 2002 defined the limits of torture as “Physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.”  This is what happens when you try to regulate war.  

To the uninitiated, the photos of Abu Ghraib are indeed shocking, but they do not come close to “organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death”.  The stigma behind it causes people not to be objective.  That’s understandable and films like this don’t help.  As I said before, the photos represent nothing more than college hazing.  It’s a matter of degree between plebes and prisoners.  The whole purpose is to humiliate and demoralize in order to dominate.  And it is vital for the captors to establish that relationship with the prisoners.  It actually will save lives.

The real questions from the film are the reasons behind the deaths of the father and al-Jamadi.  These are the true abuses.  The film never made the link that either of these two was in the photos.  So it is never clear how they died.  But abuses did occur and the wiki has more definite information.  We have to separate the treatment in the photos and the abuses.  The photos only distract and inflame from what is important.  The film implies that what was going on at Abu Ghraib was known by the commanding officers.  When in fact, it was a few sadistic individuals manipulating the naïve youth.  It was a failure of supervision of the superiors and a lack of bearing in the enlisted ranks.  But when torture is applied properly it is extremely effective.

As far as rape goes; I’m sure that did occur.  But as I mentioned before, there are probably more acts of sodomy in college hazing in this country.  There are probably more rapes occurring in our prisons than Abu Ghraib.  How many of our teachers have sex with their students?  We should not worry about the degradation of this nation’s moral fiber for what happens in war, but the degradation of this nation’s moral fiber here at home in peacetime.

Quote

@ KOS, you make some valid points and one can see why the anger is so deep in some cases, but do you feel the ME is completely innocent with regards to the current situation, and what do you feel Muslims such as those depicted in the following clip are accomplishing? Does this example not illustrate a reason why the animosity runs so deep? May I also ask your opinion of the abovementioned documentary? Do you feel there is a way for the two cultures to co-exist at all? How do you feel about the reign of the last Shah? (Mohammad Reza Pahlavi)

I know you’re asking KOS these questions, but I’m going to throw in my two cents worth.

My heart goes out to Stacie, but I think this clip is the rule and not the exception.  We see it here on this forum when Muslim apologists are confronted.  They bend over backwards in denial.  I don’t think that most people here are intentionally bashing Islam and Muslims but most are very critical of it.  We are waiting to see some evidence of this tolerance but all we get is Taqiya.  Even the gentleman at the end quoted 33:1 “O thou prophet, fear God and obey not the misbelievers and hypocrites; verily, God is ever knowing, wise!”  Well, anyone who is not Muslim are misbelievers and hypocrites.  So Muslims do not need to obey the laws of their adopted country.

I really don’t see a successful level of coexistence.  One will always have to dominate the other primarily because Sharia law and the Constitution are incompatible.  I still do have some hope for a meaningful reform in Islam but it would take such an internal civil war that the world would not be able to just stand by.  I believe the odds are with a Muslim trigger to WWIII, not with China or Russia.

I believe that the Shah was a brutal dictator, especially against his enemies.  But he was the rightful heir to the throne.  He had brought his nation into a modern world.  Under his rule, Iran had become only the third Muslim (first major) nation to give its women the right to vote.  By far, the Shah’s regime was better than the current situation.  If Cater hadn’t pulled our support for him, we wouldn’t have needed to go into Iraq twice and we wouldn’t be dealing with a belligerent Iran today.  We’ve screwed up Iraq because we’re pulling out too soon and we’ve already screwed up Afghanistan for a second time.  These are multigenerational commitments.  We’ve been there only about half of one.

[RavenHawk]

Lion6969, on 06 April 2012 - 08:23 PM, said:

Lmao!!! Are we going back in history or are we talking contemporary times?

Well, you never specified.  On this subject history is the key.  When it comes to history, you don’t have the luxury to pick and choose.  But you thought I was just a google scholar so you didn’t expect me to actually know history.  Let’s face it, you got your nose rubbed in it.

Quote

Historically my friend Europe under the guise of secularism in their forms of fascism, communism and imperialism have caused more human misery death and carnage than the history of religions put together not just Islam! You still out did them!

And let’s not forget the theocracy of Islam which is no better.  All of these are just Oligarchies which are the most common form of government of the past and present.  But even from that the evolution is clear.  From the Charter of Cluny, the Magna Carta, to the Constitution (and many others in-between), Man does strive to be free and Europe did not corner the market on misery, death, and carnage.  The past 5500 years have been pretty spread out over the planet.  Have you ever seen the friezes of the lawgivers in the Supreme Court chamber?  There are images of 18 lawgivers in the secular sense represented.  One is Confucius and one is Mohammed.  I bet you’d love to get your hands on it to destroy the graven image of Mohammed.  These men represented the slow evolutionary progress that allowed Man to pull himself out of the darkness of Oligarchy and from that wealth of knowledge, our Founding Fathers were able to give us the Constitution.

Quote

When I said name me one muslim soldier or army which has invaded a western country and imposed Islam,

I did that.

Quote

I can list you 40 or more European and other non Muslim nations who have their military occupying muslim lands imposing secularism. So wake up to reality!

OK, let’s see the list.  And then also list the reasons why for each one.  Don’t worry about me, I’ve had a rude awakening already.  I think you should wake up to reality and read the writing on the wall before it is too late.

[Parsip]

There isn't much of a difference between secular tyranny and Islamist tyranny. The result is the same: oppression. Blocking porn websites and blocking anti-government blogs are equally oppressive.

Edited by Parsip, 09 April 2012 - 11:30 PM.

[Knight Of Shadows]

the really bad image about muslims is caused by two things
one is the media and political reasons .. and the other is the so called " western " muslims
such are the ones you saw on that video march

am muslim and i don't want sharia law .. hell i don't even know a muslim who want sharia law to be applied
for all i know WE and many other arabic countries that has muslims majority didn't apply sharia law
and to hear western extremist who dare call him self muslim saying he want it in europe is just way too funny

these people painted really bad pictures about muslims out there .. just look at that ninja woman who was telling the girl
she looks naked .. many muslims here don't wear that ninja desguise and no one tells them they look naked
hell many muslim girls wears jeans and whatever they want .. you see those muslims are not the same as the muslims who
keep nagging in western countries

as far as am concerned .. some western comes to my country he respect my countries laws
and if i went there i respect theirs .. no speical treatments

coexistance is not archived due to mixing politics with religion it was started by usa
and raise of heat against islam in the media .. too obvious

and you notice that man " shekh " personally i wouldn't even call him bag of crap
is just sending invitations to heaven or hell left and right and tell her she will go to hell
like heaven it's his own proptiy and he's making the judgment ..

see to me .. those are not muslims .. they're leftovers of islam you can bring from islam it self many things
that would make those people wrong .. therefore the problem is not with islam
but with the people who flaunt it around

anyway that doesn't mean i take back or i admit that it wasn't the west fault all the terrorism that happened
coz it is the west fault in my opinion .. they knocked the door and bound to hear the answer

P.S : to everyone .. this topic is not about syria .. don't bother me with things i can't talk freely about
just because you can't find excuses to counter my points .. it's not for you Raven
it's just every time am in political debate some one comes in and say .. you think what usa did was bad .. look what they're doing in your country .. well yeah i can see that i live here the end .. it's not the topic
and if i wanted to comment on this topic there's many post about it .. but hey .. i don't and can't

[Parsip]

How do you know your interpretation of Islam is the correct one? Your views are shared by a very small minority of Muslims. And I would say if you're against Muhammad, you're not a Muslim at all.

[odas]

Parsip, on 10 April 2012 - 12:16 PM, said:

How do you know your interpretation of Islam is the correct one? Your views are shared by a very small minority of Muslims. And I would say if you're against Muhammad, you're not a Muslim at all.

How do you know it is not? His view of Islam is shared by a majority not minority however depending on where you live you are alowed to express it or not. Islam is not about staying in the stoneage times, as the Quran always states but to long for improvement of a sociaty, own life, health....which is proven by the fact how, note this please:, it improved the rights of individuals and women AT THAT time. However, tribal rituals, shovinism and butt backward cultural habits incorporated with the time into Islam made it what it is now the butt of jokes, unfortunately.
Muhammad did not want Islam and muslims to stay in one spot, hence the early islamic discoveries in science, mathematics, robotics, medicine, arhitecture and so on. And then wirdo birdos took power and everything went to the dogs. In believing of human equlity, religious freedom and prospect I am more of a muslim and follower of Muhammads teachings then any suicide bomber, tyran, child murderer, oporessor or king can ever be.

[and then]

odas, on 10 April 2012 - 04:49 PM, said:

How do you know it is not? His view of Islam is shared by a majority not minority however depending on where you live you are alowed to express it or not. Islam is not about staying in the stoneage times, as the Quran always states but to long for improvement of a sociaty, own life, health....which is proven by the fact how, note this please:, it improved the rights of individuals and women AT THAT time. However, tribal rituals, shovinism and butt backward cultural habits incorporated with the time into Islam made it what it is now the butt of jokes, unfortunately.
Muhammad did not want Islam and muslims to stay in one spot, hence the early islamic discoveries in science, mathematics, robotics, medicine, arhitecture and so on. And then wirdo birdos took power and everything went to the dogs. In believing of human equlity, religious freedom and prospect I am more of a muslim and follower of Muhammads teachings then any suicide bomber, tyran, child murderer, oporessor or king can ever be.

Odas I have a question and I want you to know that I SINCERELY am not trying to be at all confrontational.  I truly do not understand why the Muslims that you describe here will not or cannot stand as a group and at least denounce in a systematic, sustained way the wrong of "radical" Islam and terror?  I realize that Muslims are not some monolithic group who are homogeneous in their outlook.  But if a majority simply want what the rest of humanity wants and yet they will not decry the violence of the few done in their name, what other lesson are the non Muslims of the world to take?  In the US if we saw regular marches or privately funded public service announcements or ads distancing Muslims from the hateful language of the Qur'an concerning the Jews and Christians then you would see politicians having MUCH more difficulty trying to start or sustain a war in a Muslim country.
And I do not mean to say the Qur'an is a hateful book.  I meant no offense that way.  But words that call for the killing of others IS hateful no matter where it is recorded - including the Holy Bible.

[odas]

If you read the Quran you will notice that it does not embrace violance or hate against chritians or jews. It calls them people of the book and no harm is to be done tho them u n l e s s in selfdefence. A muslim, according to the Quran, is not alowed to prosecute or attack christians, jews unless they attack first. However, all three religion indulged in attacing each other that it is imposible to say now who is defending and who is attacking.
I always like to use bosnian muslims as a positive example of Islam even though there were some sideing with the nazis during ww2, but I assure you it was not to beat up jews but for other reasons which us a different topic.
Most muslims in the muslim lands live in fear of the mullahs or the government which is proven again by the slaughter of innocent people in Syria by assad.
Those muslims, or better make believe muslims, who come to other countries and steer up unrest should be sent back to where they came from or put in jail. They are not doing a favour to other muslims nor to the people of the country they live in.

[and then]

odas, on 10 April 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

If you read the Quran you will notice that it does not embrace violance or hate against chritians or jews. It calls them people of the book and no harm is to be done tho them u n l e s s in selfdefence. A muslim, according to the Quran, is not alowed to prosecute or attack christians, jews unless they attack first. However, all three religion indulged in attacing each other that it is imposible to say now who is defending and who is attacking.
I always like to use bosnian muslims as a positive example of Islam even though there were some sideing with the nazis during ww2, but I assure you it was not to beat up jews but for other reasons which us a different topic.
Most muslims in the muslim lands live in fear of the mullahs or the government which is proven again by the slaughter of innocent people in Syria by assad.
Those muslims, or better make believe muslims, who come to other countries and steer up unrest should be sent back to where they came from or put in jail. They are not doing a favour to other muslims nor to the people of the country they live in.

As a Christian and not a scholar of Islam I sometimes confuse the sayings of the Hadiths with the words of the Holy Qur'an.  I realize that the Hadiths are just writings of the traditions of Muhammad but is there not a Hadith which proclaims that war must be made with the Jews and that all unbelievers must be killed?  And I was actually more interested in why "western" Muslims do not protest the violence but I guess the answer is mostly the same.  They would be considered "kaffir" and would be held up to ridicule by traditionalists.  Thank you for the answers.

[seller2006]

Lets see. THE ISLAM that is perpetuated and followed blindly by hundreds of millions is nothing but a fabricated facade, which ultimately dumbs them down and makes them ignorant, close minded. The source from which they claim they get these things ( including modern Sharia) is all from the hadith ( much of which is taken from the christians, jews, zoroastrians , hindus). Muslims have pagan rituals, they will argue the contrary but the truth is obvious. The Quran on the other hand is the complete opposite, these people are so ignorant they actually reinterpret the Quranic verses ( the meanings can be found through research of the semetic languages)  to suit their own close minded needs. I have yet to find any form of worship in the QURAN that Allah says humans should do. In the Quran it says Allah is self sustaining, has no needs. Yet need our measly worship? think about it, the cosmos are huge, different dimensions ,etc ,etc. We are tiny, yet so important that we need to give worship? It is stated in the Quran that Allah is closer to you than your jugular vein, i wonder how you can worship something that is essentially a part of you. How can Allah have one physical house ( which is NOT mentioned ANYWHERE in Al Quran), when Allah's house is the entire universe. lol i had a forum topic on Islam a while back, reaching around 30+ pages, but Lion messed it up. i will try to post what i have researched but i promise this, DO NOT believe even a quarter the things coming out of Lion's mouth, or typewriter. The individuals arguments are fallacious, ignorant, lack evidence infact lack logic. According to the Quran, there is only one source of info for Muslims, on Islam, that is the Quran, which is complete. Yet we have people trying to justify many things including rituals by using hadith. I will post again sometime, gonna wait and read responses. Again clear your mind of what you thought the Quran was, rather interpret it from itself. Nowadays there are clergy which corrupt Islam, politics, etc ,etc ,etc. Islamic civilizations were once the pinnacle of society, thats because they followed an entirely different path of existence. Todays muslims are farthest from being muslim. its appalling

Kind of like Christians, claiming Jesus is the son of god.

Let me ask you a question, is your son a dog? someone of an entirely different species , did you have sex with a dog? EVERYTHING HAS RULES, that is why the universe works so perfectly, if these rules were broken there would be chaos, yet most religions mythologies break these rules often, i wonder what happened to Logic. This includes miracles, there are no such thing, no superstition, supernatural ,etc ,etc . Everything has an order it works by ...

Edited by seller2006, 10 April 2012 - 09:04 PM.

[and then]

I assume that rules were a natural consequence of an act of creation.  The people who created this hardware and software we are communicating through established rules for how it would work.  That in no way precludes them from communicating in some other way.  That is to say, a creator is greater than his creation.  Your use of a dog as an example is not lost on me but I expected crudeness from you.  The Qur'an is meaningless without the Hadith.  All of Islamic theology is designed with both as it's basis for being.  I have no interest in trying to debate you about Islamic doctrine or scholarship as I am totally unqualified to do so.  And I have no interest at all in becoming a scholar of that which is against my belief system and which will disappear from relevance soon enough anyway.

[Parsip]

odas, on 10 April 2012 - 04:49 PM, said:

How do you know it is not? His view of Islam is shared by a majority not minority however depending on where you live you are alowed to express it or not. Islam is not about staying in the stoneage times, as the Quran always states but to long for improvement of a sociaty, own life, health....which is proven by the fact how, note this please:, it improved the rights of individuals and women AT THAT time. However, tribal rituals, shovinism and butt backward cultural habits incorporated with the time into Islam made it what it is now the butt of jokes, unfortunately.
Muhammad did not want Islam and muslims to stay in one spot, hence the early islamic discoveries in science, mathematics, robotics, medicine, arhitecture and so on. And then wirdo birdos took power and everything went to the dogs. In believing of human equlity, religious freedom and prospect I am more of a muslim and follower of Muhammads teachings then any suicide bomber, tyran, child murderer, oporessor or king can ever be.

I don't. But his views have been shared by only a minority of Muslims and Islamic authority figures since the time of Muhammad, with possible brief interruptions during the period of Westernization in the Middle East during the mid 20th century. Could you find me a global study/poll of Muslims that says the majority are secular? The last such Muslim poll I came across, found that almost every Muslim isn't secular, and a very large majority of Middle Eastern Muslims believe apostates, like me, should be murdered, and this opinion is based on the Quran and Hadith. I'll see if I can find the study for you.

Here you go, sir: http://www.pewglobal...-and-hezbollah/

----

Muslims in Nigeria and in nearly all of the predominantly Muslim countries surveyed overwhelmingly welcome Islamic influence over their countries’ politics.

Only in Turkey are opinions about the role of Islam in political life more mixed. About four-in-ten (38%) Turkish Muslims say Islam plays a large role and embrace its influence in their country’s politics or say it is bad that Islam plays only a small role; about three-in-ten (31%) say Islam’s influence is negative.

----

When asked about the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion, at least three-quarters of Muslims in Jordan (86%), Egypt (84%) and Pakistan (76%) say they would favor making it the law.

Edited by Parsip, 10 April 2012 - 11:44 PM.

[Knight Of Shadows]

who made this ratings ?!
i see hamas getting unfavor by sunni muslims around 90 percent .. this very thing just blows this article into shreds
i can see sunnis are unfavor of hezbollah .. obvious they're shia group but hamas  ?!
hamas is widely accepted and popular among sunnis and not pretty much among shia
yet that funny rating shows .Otherwise .. weird well it's an american site .. no comment
west creates it .. westerns fakes it .. but it doesn't mean bull**** in real life

even your " supposed " study on muslims in middle east saying that You apostate should be killed is another bull**** honestly and let me ask you again .. who did that study ? based on what ? am muslim in midde east .. you can worship cats and dogs i don't care .. along with every muslim i know here and i know alot again .. i think you're striking high but without actual sense or reason maybe you should just settle for smaller claims

yeah i know religion says apostate should be killed .. but that's not what you said .. you said " and a very large majority of Middle Eastern Muslims believe apostates, like me, should be murdered, "... well fancy that .. they don't cheerup

[RavenHawk]

Knight Of Shadows, on 10 April 2012 - 04:34 AM, said:

the really bad image about muslims is caused by two things
one is the media and political reasons .. and the other is the so called " western " muslims
such are the ones you saw on that video march

I think that is inaccurate.  It’s not the media but it’s the Muslims that make it into the media.  And politics is a given.  What do you define as “western” Muslims?  Muslims that immigrate to the West from Muslim nations or those in the West that converts to Islam?  Because most of those seen in that clip (and the full version) don’t look to be European.  They aren’t the only ones.  We can point to the Taliban, Wahhabists, and maybe to some extent the Baathists.  Yes, I think there are secular arms of Islam.  Because Islam is more than just a religion.  It is also foreign policy.  And brilliant policy if you ask me.  Mohammed knew his stuff!

Quote

am muslim and i don't want sharia law .. hell i don't even know a muslim who want sharia law to be applied
for all i know WE and many other arabic countries that has muslims majority didn't apply sharia law
and

Doesn’t Iran want to apply Sharia law?  And it’s said that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt wants it.  The Taliban in Afghanistan want it.  The Wahhabists in Saudi Arabia want it.  The Palestinians in the Gaza strip (Hamas) want it.  Hezbollah in Lebanon apply it.  This isn’t me saying this.  It’s not the media.  It comes from these organizations.  Even the secular ruling parties use it to control the populations.

Quote

to hear western extremist who dare call him self muslim saying he want it in europe is just way too funny

Yeah, it’s funny scary.  Not in fear but concern.  But it happens.  The riots in France because of the veil ban.  Those riots in Luton because the police were following SOP.  What’s going to happen in London if they go ahead with building the largest Mosque in the world?  In Scotland there was a billboard honoring firemen.  There was a Dalmatian in the ad.  This insulted Muslim sensibilities and had it removed.  A grade school in NYC had its curriculum changed by the Muslim minority to focus on Islam.  And what about the building of Cordova house in the shadow of Ground Zero?  Imam Rauf says it’s building bridges, but it insults American sensibilities.  Anyone who is familiar with the history of Cordova sees this as a dog marking his territory.  This list goes on.  This is not immigrants that absorb into their newly adopted country, it is the unwanted and covert attempt at conversion as laid out in the Quran.  As the guy in Luton said.  That because we are not a Muslim nation, Muslims do not have to respect our sensibilities.  Who’s the real victim here?

Quote

these people painted really bad pictures about muslims out there ..

I won’t argue with that, but I don’t see Muslims trying to paint really good pictures to counter the bad.  Either they don’t understand or they don’t care or they are not permitted to.

Quote

just look at that ninja woman who was telling the girl
she looks naked .. many muslims here don't wear that ninja desguise and no one tells them they look naked
hell many muslim girls wears jeans and whatever they want .. you see those muslims are not the same as the muslims who
keep nagging in western countries

That’s kinda funny terminology coming from you.  Here in the West, we use the term Hijab and I admit that that may not be a totally accurate term.  There’s the headscarf, and a simple veil for over the mouth and nose, and the veil that also covers the forehead, but they are not ninja women.  I’m sure that the dress also identifies the country of origin?  I would then guess that this is not the typical Syrian dress.  And yes, I know that places like Iran and Syria, women can wear jeans, etc.  This is a remnant leftover from the Shah’s regime.  Personally if a women wishes to wear the hijab one day and jeans the next, that is her prerogative and not some requirement.

Quote

as far as am concerned .. some western comes to my country he respect my countries laws
and if i went there i respect theirs .. no speical treatments

I would totally expect that.  I know that if I was a visitor in a Muslim nation, the hospitality would be most gracious.  But that isn’t the case when Muslims visit the West for extended stays.

Quote

coexistance is not archived due to mixing politics with religion it was started by usa
and raise of heat against islam in the media .. too obvious

I’m not sure I follow here.  Islam is based on mixing religion with politics.  Allah is the ultimate authority.  The US shares a dual authority.  We say that this nation is a Christian nation, but it doesn’t control the government.  It guides the leadership and its people.  The government is based on moral secular law.  As I said in a previous posting, our form of government is an accumulation of legal thought passed on by many lawgivers.  The only commandment that Christ gave were to love one another.  And if we didn’t, there was no penalty of death.  The basis of morality is respect.  Respect of yourself.  Respect of others.  And Respect of GOD.

Quote

and you notice that man " shekh " personally i wouldn't even call him bag of crap
is just sending invitations to heaven or hell left and right and tell her she will go to hell
like heaven it's his own proptiy and he's making the judgment ..

Yes, he is making the judgment.  Just like Bin Laden.  Just like Ahmadinejad.  Just like Adja.  And Adja was 200 years ago.  The message has remained the same.  This is all the West sees because there is no other voice as strong.  We are waiting for a strong leader to rise up and quell the “bad” Islam.  Are you such a leader?

Quote

see to me .. those are not muslims .. they're leftovers of islam you can bring from islam it self many things
that would make those people wrong .. therefore the problem is not with islam
but with the people who flaunt it around

We also have the history of Islam.  And those people reflect the legacy of that history.

Quote

anyway that doesn't mean i take back or i admit that it wasn't the west fault all the terrorism that happened
coz it is the west fault in my opinion .. they knocked the door and bound to hear the answer

The fault came in that the West refuses to submit to the will of Allah.  And Islam can’t let that go.

Quote

P.S : to everyone .. this topic is not about syria .. don't bother me with things i can't talk freely about
just because you can't find excuses to counter my points .. it's not for you Raven
it's just every time am in political debate some one comes in and say .. you think what usa did was bad .. look what they're doing in your country .. well yeah i can see that i live here the end .. it's not the topic
and if i wanted to comment on this topic there's many post about it .. but hey .. i don't and can't

Well, I don’t think I needed to use Syria to counter your points, but I do hope that people respect your wishes as best as they can.  But I will say that it is all I hear of how bad the US is because we’ve done this, that, and the other thing.  But Muslims don’t seem to look at their history.  Which I can honestly say is full of more bad things done than what the US has ever done.

[RavenHawk]

odas, on 10 April 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

If you read the Quran you will notice that it does not embrace violance or hate against chritians or jews. It calls them people of the book and no harm is to be done tho them u n l e s s in selfdefence.

Jews and Christians may be “people of the book” but it is a corrupted version of the faith.  And therefore Jews and Christians are still non believers.  And What happens to non believers?  And who’s definition of “self-defense” is used?  Would any threat to Muslim society constitute the need for self-defense?  Would not submitting to the will of Allah be a threat to Muslim society?  Why or why not?