According to a member of the church I used to belong to (He was a supervisory engineer during the construction of the World Trade Center.) the impact alone did not cause the collapse. The impact jarred loose protective fire-resistant covering on the structural steel. After that, it was just a matter of time until the steel got hot enough to fail.

I was watching on TV when the second plane hit the building. It was about an hour or so from the second impact to the first collapse (I don't recall exactly how long.). That's more than enough time for the BBC to get its facts mixed up and report that the building had collapsed. As the BBC was depending on the American media for its information, the confusion is not at all surprising. Also, during an emergency of this magnitude, there simply isn't time to double-check your facts before you go to air.

Also, those shaped charges would have to survive nearly an hour in the presence of burning jet fuel. Real explosives would "cook off" long before the building collapsed.

I have been involved in several "project" fires in Colorado. The confusion surrounding each disaster, even among experienced personnel, is mind-boggling. It's not surprising that some of your facts are wrong and that conspiracy theorists can have a hayday with the mistakes.
Doug

Hi A-Fighter -- why not search the Internet regarding this aspect? Things have changed in the last few years. For instance:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/29/talibans-thriving-drug-o_n_89294.html
Taliban's Thriving Drug Operation A Sign Of Worsening Problems In Afghanistan
ANNE GEARAN | February 29, 2008 08:40 PM EST |
WASHINGTON — The Taliban have built a huge and profitable drug operation in Afghanistan while provincial governors look the other way, the latest grim sign of backsliding in a country the U.S. has spent six years and billions of dollars trying to salvage.

A report Friday on drugs _ it said Afghanistan now produces 93 percent of the world's opium poppy _ comes hand in hand with the resurgence of Taliban militants despite U.S. anti-insurgent efforts. Also on the rise: terrorist violence such as roadside bombs, suicide bombings, and attacks on police.
… Afghan farmers grew more poppies for opium in 2007 than ever before, the report said, the second straight year of record production in the nation the United States invaded.

Afghanistan is by far the world's largest heroin producing and trafficking country.
The drug trade deters progress toward a stable, economically independent democracy, concluded the annual survey of global drug production and trafficking.

The report describes an Afghan twist on the old organized crime protection racket: Drug barons supply the Taliban with money and weapons, and the hardline militants protect the growing regions and help get the drugs to market.
-=-=-

So, do you really think that the Taliban are "the good guys" fighting for freedom and liberty?

Insulting? what is..ohh asking you for your OWN personal views ahh I see..LOL come on thats just silly...


Yes this is an opinions board..the idea of the forum is posting opinions...swear to gawd...ask anyone EDIT..besides if all you can do is copy and paste up text from your holy bok then why not just post a direct link and tell everyone to read the darn book.what makes you think everyone understand the texts as written..you obviously DO you belong to the faith but people like me DON'T...NUFF SAID!!...if you dont like opinions then why bother posting in a forum?
and i dont care if you say Islam is the fastest growing this or that...that doesnt interest me..and never will...

And this is my opinion ... You are everything the world fears! The Taliban oppressed the poor people of Afghanistan--particularly women. How many of your loving, sensitive brethren put bullets through the heads of women--who had to beg for scraps of food on the streets by the way--at the local soccer field for having too much ankle showing, faces not covered properly et al?! Wow! What a grand bunch of peaceful, forgiving followers of Muhammad!



A-Fighter--appropriate name, eh?--the reports dealing with the Taliban were more than accurate. The atrocities these butchers committed were so heinous that nobody could fail to notice! They were ruthless dictators, banning the most basic of human rights. They were roundly denounced by nearly every, government, human rights organization et al out there!



Why would we give a damn about your religion?! If that had been the case, why did we not intervene long ago?! No! We attacked Afghanistan because OBL declared war on the United States ... and then attacked us on 9/11! We, in turn, declared war on AQ and terrorism. When the Taliban refused to turn him over, after lengthy discussions, we fought back. It's only a matter of time before both OBL/AQ and the Taliban are wiped from the face of the earth!



And that's where they're dying ... on the battlefield.



They are evil murdering thugs who stand not the slightest chance of regaining power. And you support them?! Go pick up your twenty dollar AK-47 and join them in their "holy" fight, AF! Good luck ...



So you never had the pleasure of living under the thumb of the Taliban?! Figures! And it takes time to rebuild a county decimated by fanatical terrorists! Five star hotel ... Of course, you fail to mention ALL the positive things happening--schools for girls re-opened (which, by the way, Taliban thugs have attacked and killed teachers, threatened students not to return or be killed), roads, hospitals, basic civil rights on and on ... Is there much to be done? You bet! Trying to put a fractured country back together isn't easy! But at least under Coalition Forces there is progress being made ... hope for a better and brighter future!



First-hand experience?! You moved away ... and came back for a brief summer visit! And Allah seems to have taken a vacation himself.



We had every right! War had been declared upon us and we were attacked. You threw the first punch! And it was the Taliban who devastated the lives of Afghanis--butchered and murdered countless thousands!



YOURS!!!!!!! You never lived under the Taliban, AF! You moved away ... and came back for a little visit!!! And your life was devastated?!

AFGHANISTAN NEWS CENTER

Destruction of statues a cover-up of Taliban's atrocities - Rabbani

Tehran, March 15, IRNA -- Demolition of Buddha statues by Afghanistan's ruling Taliban is aimed at covering up their atrocities in Bamiyan, the Leader of Afghanistan's opposition northern alliance, Burhanuddin Rabbani said here Thursday. "Taliban opted for destruction of Buddha statues after they came under heavy international pressure for their atrocities in Bamiyan," Rabbani told IRNA. He noted that destruction of statues was a loophole Taliban found. He said that fanatic and rigid-minded Taliban have insulted Afghans under guise of Islam. As a consequence of Taliban's destruction of statues, Rabbani added, certain nations became suspicious of Islam. The hardline Taliban militia ordered the slaughter of 100 cows on Thursday to atone for its "delay" in destroying Afghanistan's historic statues of the Buddha. The radical movement which seized power in 1996 issued a decree on February 27 for the destruction of all Afghanistan's mainly Buddhist statues on the grounds that they were heathen idols. It carried out the task in the teeth of international protests and appeals to save the country's cultural heritage. The destroyed statues included two world-renowned giant Buddhas carved out of a cliff near the central town of Bamiyan more than 1,500 years ago.

SOURCE: http://www.afghanistannewscenter.com/news/...mar16f2001.html

WARNING ... the following site shows atrocities committed by the taliban ... I kindly ask the MODS to please let the truth be told from muslims themselves. THIS DESERVES TO BE SEEN ...

Atrocities of the Taliban in Herat

August 13,2000: Taliban after inhuman torture, kill the war-prisoners and throw away their dead bodies in the streets of Heart city. Thousands of people many of them children watch these dead bodies. No one is allowed to bury them.

SOURCE: http://www.rawa.org/h-kill.htm

I'll stop here. The atrocities committed by the Taliban are well documented and readily available.

SINCERELY,

Sean

This is a very interesting thread. I would like to know a few things :

1. There is one part of the koran (I could be wrong) that I find really hard to believe and can't believe that muslims readily believe and that is according the koran, if you die a martyr there will be virgins waiting for you in heaven. When you die you can't come back (in the same body at least), so no one can come back and say whether or not its true, so why do muslims believe it, why don't they question it?

2. Why does there appear to be more than one version of the koran, to me, one seems to be at least 2 versions, one about peace and the other about killing non-believers and making the world an all muslim world?

3. Why do some muslims in the uk (at least) play the racism card whenever we try to stop them forcing their religion and laws on us and also when we don't give them a job and other things like that? That really annoys me, if they don't like it, they can always go to another country.

4. Can muslims eat bacon and ham? If so why?

5. Could it be possible that Allah, God, Budda and other gods are actually the same person?

6. According to a quote from the koran earlier, why do muslims think a jew will come and save them?

7. Why is a teddy bear considered disrespectul to Mohammed?

By the way I am of no religion, I cannot believe things without proof, books are not proof, besides books can be taken the wrong way.

An Iraqi, whom I know personally, is visiting at my place of business today (4/10/2008). I just learned today that he is from Mosul. He has family still living there.

He is a Muslim. He WAS a colonel in the Iraqi air force. During the Gulf War phase of this conflict, he was living in the U.S. when he got his call-up orders. He chose NOT to return to Iraq and, technically, is still a wanted man. He has lived in the U.S. for the past 17 or 18 years. His kids are about as American as anyone ever gets. They're even pizza gourmets and have given me lessons on the proper way to apply mozzarella (On top, so it will absorb the oil from the pepperoni and mitigate the salty flavor; yes, I know, pepperoni has pork in it.).

As a colonel, he dealt with the Taliban. What does he say about the Taliban? Nothing I can quote on these pages without being shut down by the mods. He hates the Taliban and the old Iraqi regime.

Tonight, he and I are having a beer together (He's a Muslim, but apparently doesn't have a problem with a beer.). I suppose, you could call him a "jack Muslim," like beer-drinking Mormons are called "jack Mormons."

I don't even have to ask his opinion of Shariah; he has seen it close up and personal and is old enough to have a perspective on it (His kids are almost as old as you.). A-Fighter, who do you think I will be listening to on the subject of the Taliban? Or the subject of Islam?
Doug

Let's go back to the 9-11 stuff, which can at least be cleared up. Pages back, but still today.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...t&p=2238966

Words can scarcely express my lack of interest in whether Mohammed Atta liked pork chops.

The "23 minute" discrepancy pertains to the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building, number 7 at the World Trade Center complex. In fairness, here is BBC's version of the events.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007...conspiracy.html

There is a still photograph of BBC reporter Jane Standley with a crawl underneath her announcing that the building has collapsed, while the building itself is still standing behind her.

http://www.wtc7.net/foreknowledge.html#bbc

See the following article both for another view of Building 7 on September 11, and for a discussion of the controlled demolition fantasy:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology...tml?page=5#wtc7

Is there any other evidence of confusion among news services about the events of September 11? Well, let's see. When do news services say today that building 7 collapsed?

The timeline is available at several sites, I used CNN's and Fox's (American electronic media with different ideologies) to compare with BBC's. All times are Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), which is GMT - 4 hours.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chro...tack/index.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1537785.stm
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,62184,00.html

Building 7 collapses at 17:10 (CNN) or 17:20 (BBC) or 17:25 (Fox).

If after six and a half years, three witness who set their watches by atomic clocks cannot agree more closely than within 15 minutes, then surely the inference that there was some confusion on the day itself is warranted.

CNN records that it learned building 7 was on fire at 16:10. That means everybody else watching the story knew it, too. Since there was no possibility of firefighter response, absolutely none, it was inevitable that the building would collapse.

BBC wanted the scoop, so it went to air too fast, reporting the inevitable as already accomplished, and ended up looking foolish.

End of story.

I will be very frank with you A Fighter, you are very young & apparently awe struck by the Taliban whom you obviously idolize. You give me the impression that you believe they know all that is to be known about your religion & therefore you relegate all judgment to them. Twice you delegated to them the decision making of what is right & what is wrong , because they "have many scholars" & " "I would trust them on this, because they know what is right and what is not." Islam boasts that it is a religion without priesthood & therefore open for every muslim to study. I repeat my questions again A, what is YOUR take on even the possibility of Taliban selling drugs when there is a clear fatwa from one of the oldest islamic universities equating it with the prohibited alcohol & subjecting those who consume, trade, or even carry it , to a clear quranic curse? Bear in mind also the other rule that 'killing unjustly even one person, is equal to killing all of humanity'. Do YOU think it would please Allah to waste the life of even one victim in Afghanistan or the west ( drug dealing & consumption are not exactly the safest activities in the world)? Who is right the Azhar or the Taliban?
It is becoming increasingly apparent that maybe the open minds & misconceptions which need clearing are those held in the islamic world not outside. Muslims seem to have accepted de facto a sacred priesthood which decides & defines everything for them. The four main schools of law have been elevated to a quasi holy position. Scholars such as Ghazali or Bukhari or even Mawdudi are above questioning, even if what they experienced centuries ago is now ancient history. Are the experiences which shaped their works still relevant? Abu Hanifa Al No'man said "they were men and so are we" ( ie we are all human, not demi gods) .Many believe that when the door of Ijtihad was slammed shut , intellectual ossification started. There are sheikhs who still avoid giving a clear answer to whether it is still acceptable to take slaves as war booty or not, even though the vast majority of average muslims already know that the answer is a definite no! Obscurity in this, and such matters as terrorism, jihad, drugs, the position of women etc are what alienates people from islam, not misconceptions they might have which need only a simple explanation; or lengthy proofs of whichever scientific law is miraculously mentioned in the quran. Until muslims rethink the interpretation of their laws & re-open ijtihad, discussions with others will mostly tend to become like a debate among people whose eyes are veiled & ears plugged shut: everyone talking & no one really listening to or understanding the other.

You don't need someone to die and come back to life to tell you what is in the afterlife. It has all been explained in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, but as you said that you don't really believe in books, but rather in proof, that is your choice.

There is only ONE Qur'an, and nobody can change that. Nowhere in the Qur'an is it mentioned that you are allowed to kill non-Muslims.

Noble Qur'an 5:32. Whosoever kills a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind.

Noble Qur'an 4:93. If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (For ever): And the wrath and the curse of God are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him...

But don't think that this prohibition of killing innocents is restricted to Muslims only.

Abdullah ibn `Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated that the Prophet (Peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Whoever killed a mu`ahid (a non-Muslim having a treaty with the Muslims, or a non-Muslim citizen) shall not smell the (fragrant) smell of Paradise though it can be smelled from a distance of forty years (of traveling)." (Al-Bukhari).

I need some more explaining on this one. If I answer it like it is, I may not have understood you properly, and give you a totally wrong answer...

We Muslims consider the eating of pork to be forbidden, with a limited exception to avoid starvation. Allah instructed us not to eat it in the Qur'an, and so we have to obey Him.

Noble Qur'an 2:173. He hath only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that on which any other name hath been invoked besides that of Allah. But if one is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits,- then is he guiltless. For Allah is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful.

Did you know that a pig cannot be slaughtered at the neck for it does not have a neck. That is according to its natural anatomy. A Muslim reasons that if the pig was to be slaughtered and fit for human consumption the Creator would have provided it with a neck. Nonetheless, all that aside, I am sure you are well informed about the harmful effects of the consumption of pork, in any form, be it pork chops, ham, bacon.

Yes, it could be possible. I want to show you a video lecture by a man called Zakir Naik. He is a well-known Muslim speaker, and the topic of his talk is "Similarities between Hinduism and Islam". It explains everything in great detail, so I highly recommend it to you. Here is Part 1 (of 11).

Are you talking about Prophet Jesus? (Peace be upon him). Yes, he will come back one day and unite the Muslims & Christians. He is not a Jew, if that is what you are thinking, but he is a Muslim. He was not crucified, but was raised to Heaven, and he will come back one day (very soon). This website will explain everything to you: http://www.jesuswillreturn.com.

We don't make pictures or idols of our Prophets. To name a teddy bear Mohammad is disrespectful, because our Prophet (Peace be upon him) is not that low. Allah forbids us to make pictures or statues of living things, such as humans and birds etc. In one Hadith, Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon him) said the following about drawing pictures:

Whoever makes a picture will be punished by Allah till he puts life in it, and he will never be able to put life in it. (Bukhari 3:428).

So we are not even allowed to create a teddy bear (which is a 'living' animal), let alone naming it after our Prophet! Do you see the logic? Now, if some people hear the name of Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon him) they will think of that teddy bear. This is what we want to avoid.[/font]

[quote name='A-Fighter' date='Apr 11 2008, 05:21 AM' post='2240103']
You don't need someone to die and come back to life to tell you what is in the afterlife. It has all been explained in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, but as you said that you don't really believe in books, but rather in proof, that is your choice.

There is only ONE Qur'an, and nobody can change that. Nowhere in the Qur'an is it mentioned that you are allowed to kill non-Muslims.
Noble Qur'an 5:32. Whosoever kills a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind.




Please don't use this as your arguement when you wish to back up your arguements you cannot simply take a few sentences out of the Koran your quote is out of context and is missing its vital lines here is the correct meaning of this line-

[quote]For instance, after September 11, 2001, many Muslims and apologists of Islam glibly came out with the following Koranic quote to show that Islam and the Koran disapproved of violence and killing: Sura V.32: “Whoever killed a human being shall be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind ”.

Unfortunately, these wonderful sounding words are being quoted out of context.

Here is the entire quote: V.32: “That was why We laid it down for the Israelites that whoever killed a human being, except as a punishment for murder or other villainy in the land, shall be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind; and that whoever saved a human life shall be regarded as though he had saved all mankind. Our apostles brought them veritable proofs: yet it was not long before many of them committed great evils in the land. Those that make war against God and His apostle and spread disorder shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the country.”

The supposedly noble sentiments are in fact a warning to Jews. Behave or else is the message. Far from abjuring violence, these verses aggressively point out that anyone opposing the Prophet will be killed, crucified, mutilated and banished!

Behind the textual context argument is thus the legitimate suspicion that by quoting only a short passage from the Koran I have somehow distorted its real meaning. I have, so the accusation goes, lifted the offending quote from the chapter in which it was embedded, and hence, somehow altered its true sense. What does “context” mean here? Do I have to quote the sentence before the offending passage, and the sentence after? Perhaps two sentences before and after? The whole chapter? Ultimately, of course, the entire Koran is the context.[quote]-Ibn Warraq.

So do you think if there is somebody like Hanibal Lecter or Vlad the impaler out there he should be showered with rose

By the way this guy Ibn Warraq you adore is a phony.

some signs of good muslims are

- Dont drink alcohol
- Dont lie
- Dont steal
- Honesty
- Loyalty
- Will not cheat on their spouse
- Dont eat pork
- Infact eat only halal food

This is biggest bull --- pardon my tongue

look at the stats

Muslim in Europe are most discriminated against
They are victime of hate crimes
They are the poorest most uneducated ethnic group

Really?? and how do you suppose white or black people are treated in say...ohh I dunno - Iraq??

You clearly have no real concept of what my reply was about do you! I'm simply highlighting the fact that you can't use extracts from the Koran in this way since the lines are out of context. And I find the above line offensive I do not adore Ibn Warraq I am simply using his articles to highlight my points. And can you explain or even back up with some research to show he is a phony. I'm not just going to take your word without any articles or research to back up your ridiculous comments!

Just to help you understand this is the so called phony's references seems pretty strong to me!-Ibn Warraq (born 1946) is a secularist author of Pakistani origin and founder of the Institute for the Secularisation of Islamic Society and a senior research fellow at the Center for Inquiry focusing on Qur'anic criticism

Warraq gathered world notice through his controversial historiographies of the early centuries of the Islamic timeline and has published works which question mainstream conceptions of the period. He is the author of seven books, including Why I Am Not a Muslim (1995), The Origins of the Koran (1998), and Quest for the Historical Muhammad, (2000). He has also spoken at the United Nations "Victims of Jihad" conference organized by the International Humanist and Ethical Union alongside speakers such as Bat Ye'or, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Simon Deng.

The spectator 3 October 2007 "The great Islamic scholar, Ibn Warraq, one of the great heroes of our time. Personally endangered, yet unremittingly vocal, Ibn Warraq leads a trend. Like a growing number of people, he refuses to accept the pretence that all cultures are equal. Were Ibn Warraq to live in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, he would not be able to write. Or if he did, he would not be allowed to live. Among his work is criticism of the sources of the Qur'an. In Islamic states this constitutes apostasy. It is people like him, who know how things could be, who understand why Western values are not just another way to live, but the only way to live — the only system in human history in which the individual is genuinely free (in the immortal words of Thomas Jefferson) to ‘pursue happiness’."
^ The spectator Oct 2007

A-Fighter, it's good to see you back.

Could I please ask you, since you brought up the comparison in crime between Saudi Arabia and the USA, how many muslim women in Saudi Arabia, having been raped and gone to court to see their abusers brought to justice, have escaped being punished themselves for the crime of having put themselves in a position to be raped?

How many muslim women in Saudi Arabia have successfully prosecuted their husbands for spousal abuse (and please do not pretend this does not happen)?

I am interested in clearing up my misconceptions about the relative parity between the sexes in the Islamic justice system.

Afighter, what pigs have you seen, all the pigs I've seen have necks, I have not seen any site that states pigs do not have necks, the following is from wikipedia about pigs in islam :



So in answer to my question, muslims cannot eat bacon and ham or lard. Yes pork can be harmful, but only if not cooked properly (which applies to alot of food)


mainpoint, if you lived in the uk, you would know what I am talking about, besides, muslims are given a bad name by other muslims who use racism to get what they want here and our government lets them get away with becaue they don't want to upset them. I myself respect all people and religions, when muslims come over here they must follow out laws and rules, if they don't want to then they should go to another country and not try to force their own laws and rules on us, if we every tried to do that in a muslim country such as afghanistan or saudi arabia then we would probably be killed.

You know, I sometimes wonder if suicide bombers ever think if there could be fellow muslims in places where they bomb, like for instance 9/11 or 7/7, there might have been muslims killed them attacks, I personally think that martys such as suicide bombers go to hell rather than heaven with virgins (besides how do they know they are female virgins and not male virgins?)

Also, I find it disguting that muslim women are killed because they have been raped, I believe it is an offence to have sex with a stranger, can any muslim explain why the rapist does not get punished? and why the women are punished for something which is not their fault?

QUOTE (freaky1974 @ Apr 11 2008, 08:55 AM)

So in answer to my question, muslims cannot eat bacon and ham or lard. Yes pork can be harmful, but only if not cooked properly (which applies to alot of food)

This is how one website describes Pigs and Islam:

"You are what you eat" - Native American proverb.

In folklore terms, eating the meat of the pig is said to contribute to lack of morality and shame, plus greed for wealth, laziness, indulgence, dirtiness and gluttony. We insult a person by calling him or her a "Pig" when they demonstrate these characteristics. Muslims are forbidden by God to eat the meat of the pig (pork).

This is detailed in verses 2:173, 5:3, 6:145, and 16:115 of the Qur'an. An exemplary verse is quoted here: "He has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and any (food) over which the name of other than Allah has been invoked. But if one is forced by necessity, without willful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits, then Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

Is Pork Forbidden to Muslims Only?

The Jews and Christians are also forbidden from eating pork. Here is a quote from the Old Testament to that effect: "And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase." Deuteronomy 14:8.

Many Christians believe that this verse was directed only at the Jews. But Jesus himself says during the Sermon on the Mount; "Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." Some Christians say that, after a vision by St. Peter, God cleansed all animals and made them fit and lawful for human consumption. If ALL animals are cleansed by Peter's vision, this includes dogs, cats, vultures, and rats: but you just don't see people getting excited about a cat-meat sandwich like they do over barbecued pork or bacon. Others say that it was Paul who rescinded the law forbidding pork to humans, in order to appease the Romans, who enjoyed the taste of pig-meat. Many excuses have been given, but none are very sound.

Many Far Eastern traditions also discourage the eating of pork. The 3,000 year old Confucian Book of Rites says, "A gentleman does not eat the flesh of pigs and dogs." Although many Chinese are avid eaters of pork today, physicians of ancient China recognized pork-eating as the root of many human ailments. Buddhists, Jains and Hindus usually avoid eating any kind of meat.

Bad effects of pork consumption.

Pig's bodies contain many toxins, worms and latent diseases. Although some of these infestations are harbored in other animals, modern veterinarians say that pigs are far more predisposed to these illnesses than other animals. This could be because pigs like to scavenge and will eat any kind of food, including dead insects, worms, rotting carcasses, excreta (including their own), garbage, and other pigs.

Influenza (flu) is one of the most famous illnesses which pigs share with humans. This illness is harbored in the lungs of pigs during the summer months and tends to affect pigs and humans in the cooler months. Sausage contains bits of pigs' lungs, so those who eat pork sausage tend to suffer more during epidemics of influenza. Pig meat contains excessive quantities of histamine and imidazole compounds, which can lead to itching and inflammation; growth hormone, which promotes inflammation and growth; sulphur-containing mesenchymal mucus, which leads to swelling and deposits of mucus in tendons and cartilage, resulting in arthritis, rheumatism, etc.



Sulfur helps cause firm human tendons and ligaments to be replaced by the pig's soft mesenchymal tissues, and degeneration of human cartilage. Eating pork can also lead to gallstones and obesity, probably due to its high cholesterol and saturated fat content. The pig is the main carrier of the taenia solium worm, which is found it its flesh. These tapeworms are found in human intestines with greater frequency in nations where pigs are eaten. This type of tapeworm can pass through the intestines and affect many other organs, and is incurable once it reaches beyond a certain stage. One in six people in the US and Canada has trichinosis from eating trichina worms which are found in pork. Many people have no symptoms to warn them of this, and when they do, they resemble symptoms of many other illnesses. These worms are not noticed during meat inspections, nor are they killed by salting or smoking. Few people cook the meat long enough to kill the trichinae. The rat (another scavenger) also harbors this disease. There are dozens of other worms, germs, diseases and bacteria which are commonly found in pigs, many of which are specific to the pig, or found in greater frequency in pigs.

Pigs are biologically similar to humans, and their meat is said to taste similar to human flesh. Pigs have been used for dissection in biology labs due to the similarity between their organs and human organs. People with insulin-dependent diabetes usually inject themselves with pig insulin.

Kindness to animals.

Every creature was created by Allah for a purpose. The Prophet (Peace be upon him) always encouraged being kind to animals. Although we should not eat the meat of the pig, it doesn't mean that we should hate pigs. We should show them the same kindness as any other animal, and not abuse or torture them. Pigs score high on tests devised to determine animal intelligence; in other words, they are very smart. It used to be that Europe people believed that pork would taste better if the pigs were kept in a state of filth, but this is not the natural inclination of the pig. When left to their own devices, it is said that pigs do not like to soil their sleeping quarters. As for their tendency to wallow in mud, that is done mainly to keep cool.

References:

* "Animals in Islam", by Al-Hafiz B.A. Masri.
* "Diet for a New America", by John Robbins.
* "Islamic Dietary Laws and Practices", by M.M. Hussaini, M.S. and A.H. Sakr, Ph.D.
* "Homotoxicology", by Dr. Hans-Heinrich Reckweg.
* "Muslims in Alien Society", by Muhammad Samiallah.

QUOTE (Leonardo @ Apr 11 2008, 08:08 AM)

A-Fighter, it's good to see you back.

It's good to see you too.

QUOTE (Leonardo @ Apr 11 2008, 08:08 AM)

Could I please ask you, since you brought up the comparison in crime between Saudi Arabia and the USA, how many muslim women in Saudi Arabia, having been raped and gone to court to see their abusers brought to justice, have escaped being punished themselves for the crime of having put themselves in a position to be raped?

Your question is alright, but I cannot give you an answer. This is because I can't find any sources which speak publicly about crime in Saudi Arabia. It is very hard to find anything about that country, because they don't show everything to us.

QUOTE (Leonardo @ Apr 11 2008, 08:08 AM)

How many muslim women in Saudi Arabia have successfully prosecuted their husbands for spousal abuse (and please do not pretend this does not happen)?

Please don't blame me for not answering this question, because it is the same as the one above. I know that it is happening, nobody denies that, but the numbers don't go into the many thousands or something like that. But if we assume that it happens about 1 million times a year, does this mean that the justice system is wrong? Or does it mean that the husbands are at fault?

I am sorry for the not-so-clear answers, but you are welcome to ask other questions.

QUOTE (freaky1974 @ Apr 11 2008, 09:55 AM)

You know, I sometimes wonder if suicide bombers ever think if there could be fellow muslims in places where they bomb, like for instance 9/11 or 7/7, there might have been muslims killed them attacks, I personally think that martys such as suicide bombers go to hell rather than heaven with virgins (besides how do they know they are female virgins and not male virgins?)

No Muslim would carry out an attack such as in 7/7. The point you made about Muslims being killed by the blasts is a good one. Human life is precious! Not just the Muslims or just the Christians, but every single human being, because we are all equal in the sight of Allah. So to say that these suicide bombers might kill some Muslims, is the same as saying that these suicide bombers might kill some people. I would not go as far as saying that they will go to Hell, because their real intentions are known to Allah only. He is the One to decide whether these people will go to Heaven or Hell, not you or me. And yes, the virgins will be female for men, because that is what Allah has told us.

That is a fine answer.


Virginity is an attribute for which a case may be made one way or the other. But one attribute which I highly prize is that the lady be a volunteer.

So how does that work? Do these women have any choice in the matter? What happens if one of the damsels assigned to me decides "all things considered, I'd rather be with Brad Pitt?"

I understand that that is unrealistic, since no real woman would ever choose him over me, and yet it is within the scope of the possible, hypothetically speaking. What do you think?

Just a general reminder for this thread:

Thank you.

Ok. Where are the stats for this claim?

MK,

Sean

AF, you stated your love for the Taliban. May I ask ... Is your father/relatives Taliban? Also, where are you receiving your education? Madrassa? Mosque?



A simple search provides numerous sources ...

Crimes against women in Saudi Arabia
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari...-8&oe=UTF-8

Sean

Am I right in saying that you think that some people want to have a choice in who they will marry in Paradise? If you are in Paradise, you can do (almost) anything, so I think you are right. Here are some Hadiths regarding Paradise:

• A women in Paradise will be with the last one of her husbands. [Tareekh Ar Raqah, Bayhaqie].
  
  
• No one will be unmaried in Paradise. [Muslim].
  
  
• The Shaheed (A person who dies in the way of Allah) will marry 72 women of Paradise. [Tirmidhie, Ibn Majah].
  
  
• Only the veil of the women of Paradise is better than this whole world and what is in it. [Bukharie].
  
  
• The women of Paradise will sing for their husbands in the most beautiful voices that anyone has ever heard. [Tabarani].

I would really like to hear your opinons on my previous post here it is for you again -Please don't use this as your arguement when you wish to back up your arguements you cannot simply take a few sentences out of the Koran your quote is out of context and is missing its vital lines here is the correct meaning of this line-

[quote]For instance, after September 11, 2001, many Muslims and apologists of Islam glibly came out with the following Koranic quote to show that Islam and the Koran disapproved of violence and killing: Sura V.32: “Whoever killed a human being shall be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind ”.

Unfortunately, these wonderful sounding words are being quoted out of context.

Here is the entire quote: V.32: “That was why We laid it down for the Israelites that whoever killed a human being, except as a punishment for murder or other villainy in the land, shall be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind; and that whoever saved a human life shall be regarded as though he had saved all mankind. Our apostles brought them veritable proofs: yet it was not long before many of them committed great evils in the land. Those that make war against God and His apostle and spread disorder shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the country.”

The supposedly noble sentiments are in fact a warning to Jews. Behave or else is the message. Far from abjuring violence, these verses aggressively point out that anyone opposing the Prophet will be killed, crucified, mutilated and banished!

Behind the textual context argument is thus the legitimate suspicion that by quoting only a short passage from the Koran I have somehow distorted its real meaning. I have, so the accusation goes, lifted the offending quote from the chapter in which it was embedded, and hence, somehow altered its true sense. What does “context” mean here? Do I have to quote the sentence before the offending passage, and the sentence after? Perhaps two sentences before and after? The whole chapter? Ultimately, of course, the entire Koran is the context.[quote]-Ibn Warra

It doesn't look good to me


No one will be unmaried in Paradise ( no freedom of choice)


The Shaheed (A person who dies in the way of Allah) will marry 72 women of Paradise ( one would be quite enough for me )


The women of Paradise will sing for their husbands in the most beautiful voices that anyone has ever heard. [Tabarani].( I would prefer the "Stones " myself )


but on the whole it sounds better that the Christian paradise,,where nobody seems to know what they do there


fullywired

MK,

Sean

No wonder AF loves the Taliban so much FW!!!!!

MK,

Sean

naughty, naughty...........

How come no notified me of a thread about clearing misconceptions about islam. Just at a quick glance, i already see, the same ground i have covered several times, keeps coming back.

for those of you who use Ibn Warrq, as a source, let me tell you now, I know the of the guy, I have debated with the guy, he has no knowledge of islam, no authority in islam, and all his material is based on Tisdalls, work, a christian missionary, he also uses some aspects of Watts research too. What you need to realise is this, the orientalists an scholars, respected and credible, have come to the conclusion ages ago, that Tisdalls, work was rubbish and futile and extremely bias, all of Ibn Warraq research is based on this one dude, who is not even accepted by his peers. Ask youreself this, if he really had any creibility, why use a name, which cannot be traced down, he is allegedly pakistani, well in pakistan people dont name themselves in the same fashion the ARabs did, the fact he uses Ibn Warraq, is to sound more muslim and arab and credible, its all nonsense. i suggest to many of you including SEAN, to go back to the some thread which discussed the textual integrity of the quran, and how research old and modern have come to a conclusion that the textual integrity of the quran is 100% fine.

there are some people here put forward question, in such away that they are trying to fox people in. Some of your questions are twisted and full of incuniations, therefore most of you also need to address your questions appropriately, otherwise, we are going to have to straighten the question first and then address the question itself.

I must admit i have not read every page, but i will, to catch up, but some of you better be prepared for a proper debate then, dont let emotion rule you or become offensive.

ohhh nooo you didnt get the memo lol

I keeps coming back and still doesnt get anywhere...does it stop people from making repeat threads on the SAME THING??..NO..


Better be?? wow the dictating begins ....


Well like any person who posts...if they are asked questions..and they cant really answer...they then get rude to the member that asked the questions and BINGO..they become abusive.....

QUOTE (Dante's Inferno @ Apr 11 2008, 02:18 PM)

I would really like to hear your opinons on my previous post here it is for you again

Is this where you got your information from? http://www.gamla.org.il/english/article/2005/jan/win2.htm.

I will give you a link to a website which refutes everything this man (and many more people) said: http://www.answering-christianity.com/islam_and_terrorism.htm.

You don't need my opinion, I just want to clarify that this man is a lier, a deceiver etc.

PS: Thank you for standing up for me Ozi. I am fighting a losing battle with some people here (Don't take this literally). They (some members here) twist words and whole sentences to trap me, and then their true intentions become clear.

You are just a child..you have a long way to go..and I am not trying to be ignorant

There is a great Muslim member of UM..actually his ID is - muslim..........<--this guy can fairly handle any question..and he never gets into fights....for he knows how to answer

The same with christians...when they answer using their own words and explain what bible verses mean ect...then its rare they get annoyed....

Its when people post up holy verses and religious texts to use them as ways to answer questions, is what really gets to people

especially on a skeptics board

Men and women in islam are equal, in something men exceed, and in something women exceed, but overall both are equal, the only thing in the eyes of god the we can all exceed each other in and have a higher status, is in piety.




I think the taliban's intentions initially was to bring islamic law and an islamic state back to the world, but in my opinion their rushed it and forced it in some instances, and transgressed some boundaries. To have an islamic law and an islamic state, one needs to have the state of islam within, for it to manifest outseide and around them, simply, the people needed educating more about islam, before it was implemented, and not forced.









Its true the quran is gods word and god is not liar, and it cannot be denied and there are many falsification tests in the quran for you to take up. Asfor the status of men over women, your basis is the english transaltions, a lot is lost in translations, the original arabic says men are protectors over women not higher in status, although insome cases women andmen exceed each other, overall the are equal.

for those know me well, like you do, i am always prepared to debate and set people right. I for one are not like many here, who comment out ignorance, i speak to christian, jews, hindus, aethiests, etc etc, and with each case i know their religion their source their scripture and their cornstones of belief. I ask you all of this, how many knew anything about islam in UM, until we informed you, or what you had seen on tV, heard from others etc. The people in UM who know something about islam, can be counted on one hand. most speak about islam, with out even doing their own research and repeat what others have said, or troll over the internet to find something negative etc, how many of you have ever picked up the quran and i dont mean one publishe by Penguin or something like that, i mean a proper quran, credible translation etc, hardly any, then you speak to us and question is with twisted question, containing incinuations etc, You speak out ignorance. At least i can say, i dont, i speak with an informed mind, and tolerant of the other religions , as i often udnerstand them better than those who practise them, this is a recommendation from islam, know the other religions well, so one does not speak out ignorance, which may cause offence.




No problem, i dont stand for anyone, most here can do that for themselves, i comes here tostand and show the truth, the decision is then with those who are exposed to it.

P.S, I only read the first page of this thread and had post my replies,, i have not even got to page two yet. LOL

Why bother going to all that trouble?? why not make a new thread..only more interesting about Islam

What I mean is...........set yourself up to answer questions and give your OWN view and maybe explain what certain texts meen from your holy book??
I for one would rather see that...because when someone posts up text verses from their bible of holy book...it is confusing...its best explained using your OWN personal ideas...then you would find more people learning somehting different

I earlier asked A-Fighter questions..only because I was seriously confused..but he rants and expected me to search through several pages to look for an answer.. that was only texts from his holy book.........that wasnt exactly helpful

I would be more keen to read personal views and it all explained more...so you could make a new thread...??

I agree, i think more should come from muslims, i think the misconceptions about islam can be blamed on bias media, but what have we muslims done, nothing. Sat on our arses, becoming reactionaries, and disillusioned youth turning to violence, further perpetuated by western states foreign policies. I blame muslim just as much, they have forgotten the pillar of islam, which is Dawah (invititation) meaning educating muslims and nonmuslims about the true islam. The more of us here can do that thebetter, its unfortunate that many poeple here, have never thought of picking up a quran and reading it, along with credible sources of hadith anc commentary, and know for them selves, but its our job to get the message to everyone, about islam. Its true light. The more we know, the more we tolerate, the less we know, the more we fear.



I agree 100%.



Most of it started during the crusader period and has remained there especailly in the west, since then, although thankfully things have changed, but the media also like to sing and dance about minorities who cause problems, regardless of faith, but in the main they do this about islam, linking terrorism with islam, so when people here islam, they naturally connect terrorism to it.




I think 9-11 has many holes in it, no body is really certain who did, there is varied information out there, some reliable some not. Who ever did it was wrong and should be punihsed, but to get one man, do we destroy whole nations.

We went out for that beer last night. He had a Michelob and I had a lemon aide (I was driving.). We had fried chicken. A lot of Muslims in America "go with the flow" and don't follow their religious teachings to the letter, just as a lot of Jews don't follow Hasidic laws and Christians ignor most of the rules they're supposed to live by. Whether that makes him "a good Muslim" is not for me to judge, but he is a good man.
Doug

i understad what you are saying, why cant people hae their personal views on the verse, their interpretation of them, but in islam, the highest source and authority is the Quran, this is then followed by what muhammed siad and did, Hadith. You see quran is gods word, muhammed was the walking talking quran to follow, anything which need clarification from the quran, for example it says pray five time a day, but how etc, it does not mention, thats where muhammed comes in to show how, when and what, from hadith. Therefore the highest authority on the quran is muhammed first, then the best of his companiions, followed by the best imams after that, what i think personally hold a value of zero in islam, if it snot from hadith or quran, it has no value, regardless if the opinion is a world renonwn scholar.

It haram for us to drink, tke drugs etc and eat food which is not kosher. However, this only makes the person a bad practising muslim, but still a muslims, because he has a mustard seeds worth of faith in allah and his messenger, even that could be enough for him to go to heaven, but not before he serves his punishment for sins.

There are so many questions about Islam Ozi...just like there are for christianity...but you have to understand as this is a skeptics board, then you should expect those of us that dont quiet grasp what certain texts mean...

If these are explained and also, what would be nice is other questions about the islamic/muslim culture on how they live ect....that would be interesting and IT cold well clear up a lot of ,misconceptions

See I didn't know you wernt allowed to drink......so I ask you..why would it make you a bad practising muslim if you did?

I once worked for a muslim family..the father (owner of the store) used to pop out for a quick pint lol..he said it helped him unwind

I totally agree, and i am here at your service, with the will and help and guidance from allah, i will hopefully clear any misconceptions, with intelligence wisdom and being nice.

I understand to some, the teaching in islam will be very alien, unknown concepts etc, like i said we often fear what we dont understand, inclduing muslims.

[quote name='Ozi' date='Apr 11 2008, 08:55 PM' post='2241110']
naughty, naughty...........

How come no notified me of a thread about clearing misconceptions about islam. Just at a quick glance, i already see, the same ground i have covered several times, keeps coming back.

for those of you who use Ibn Warrq, as a source, let me tell you now, I know the of the guy, I have debated with the guy, he has no knowledge of islam, no authority in islam, and all his material is based on Tisdalls, work, a christian missionary, he also uses some aspects of Watts research too. What you need to realise is this, the orientalists an scholars, respected and credible, have come to the conclusion ages ago, that Tisdalls, work was rubbish and futile and extremely bias, all of Ibn Warraq research is based on this one dude, who is not even accepted by his peers.

Ask youreself this, if he really had any creibility, why use a name, which cannot be traced down, he is allegedly pakistani, well in pakistan people dont name themselves in the same fashion the ARabs did, the fact he uses Ibn Warraq, is to sound more muslim and arab and credible, its all nonsense.

The pen name Ibn Warraq (Arabic: ابن وراق‎, most literally "son of a papermaker") is used due to his concerns for his personal safety and one that has been adopted by dissident authors throughout the history of Islam. The name refers to 9th century skeptical scholar Muhammad al Warraq . Warraq adopted the pseudonym in 1995 when he completed his first book, entitled "Why I Am Not a Muslim".
Does this answer your statement!

Great...

Ok questions galore lol

1 - Is it true that when a muslim is getting married..the wedding celebrations last for a week?? or have I gotten confused with hindu?

2 - Why do they pray so early in the morning? I mean realy early

3- Why do they have arranged marriages?