I'm sick of the rabid Islamophobia on these boards...

[Bartek]

Hello.
Here, in Poland we have moslem minority since middle ages.
Polish Tatars have today their own, very specific cultur, they are still moslems. And thru centuries they served Poland as Polish moslem patriots. They were allways excellent worriors and protected south-easten frontiers of Poland from… islamic armies of Ottoman Empire. King Jan III Sobieski used troops of Polish Tatars by Vien in 1683, when he protected Europe from Tukish invasion.

Today about 1500 000 persons in Poland have tatarian ancestry. By the way - the word “uhlans” (Polish cavallry) is tatarian and means in theit language “brave riders”.

crwflags.com/fotw/flags/pl-tatar.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatars#Polish_Tatars
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipka_Tatars

pozrdawiam

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

And you know Jesus only lived from 23 to 33 years maximum as per the Catholics; who knows what he would have done to his enemies if he would have lived longer, only GodAllahYHWH knows.

If nobody knows why do you insinuate that he would do anything negative? His entire life message is one of love and forgiveness, well, except for a small unfortunate temper tantrum in a temple of money lenders.

I think it is very unfair of you to come to a Christian site and insinuate on what Jesus may have done if he had lived. He didn’t so don’t insinuate. It is risible.

 

[AJV]

That’s Saudi Arabia not Islam. To make a foolish statement like that you would have to ignore the freedom of religion that exists in Syria, Iran, Lebanon, The United Arab Emirates, Indonesia…and the VAST majority of Islamic countries

While I agree there is a freedom of religion (I am living the gulf after all, and going to church, am I not?) it is only to an extent- not absolute, like in the West. Of course, my priest always reminds me that we should be grateful for what we have. But, for example, it is not legal for a Muslim to convert. The priests cannot wear clerical clothes in the street. There are limitations on public display of religion. Sometimes they have practises that I’m not 100% sure jive with the Sharia (but then I’m hardly the expert in that) like if a non Muslim, even a Christian or Jew wants to marry a Muslim man, the court says they have to convert first.

Interesting BTW, the you mention the Emirates. The people over there have a funny situation since its a federation. The more progressive states like Dubai, it is OK. But in places like Sharjah and Ras-Al-Khaimah, it is enforced strictly. Speaking of RAK, I remember when the appeal went out to all churches in the Gulf (at that time I was not Catholic but my uncle was very involved in it) to raise money to build the church there. And after the church was built, the ruler revoked his permission and took the land back. By the grace of God, it was returned a couple of years back when the Anglican church was burnt down.

I do indeed think that some of the things one reads on the Internet are greatly exaggerated like the extent of “dhimmi” or the role of Saudi Arabia (though there, I am not sure one can exaggerate because SA exports its brand of Salafi Islam) or *certain *teachings from the sura and the ahadith which are interpreted other than a proper exegesis (as if a Muslim came and started telling us that we should observe the Jewish law because that’s what Jesus said). OTOH, there is a certain radicalism - not expoused mainly by the government but it is growing among the people- though perhaps attributing it solely to Islam is silly, because there is a good deal of anti-Americanism there also…

 

[StandUp4Truth]

I don’t think it’s acceptable to lump all Muslims together and say that their religion is evil, but I do agree with Pope Benedict’s plea to mainstream Islam to work harder to reign in the radicals.

As a Catholic, I would be offended if people stereotyped my beliefs as being identical to other Christians (Mormons, Evangelicals, etc.). Also, let’s not forget that the Bible has it’s fair share of violence in the name of God, we just don’t pay much attention to it because no Christians are using these instances to justify a holy war.

I don’t see how anyone could find problems with peace-loving Muslims wanting to live their lives free from persecution. Religious intolerance, maybe?

If you’d like to know how it feels, go to a forum like 123 Christian and announce that you’re a Catholic. They’ll tell you that your religion is founded on lies and that the Pope is the anti-christ.

 

[paarsurrey]

I think you may be right. But this thread is not about me. Nor is it about you. It’s about the original poster, Generic Man, and his claim as follows…

His original post would have more credibility if he admits that he has studied/researched Islam and Muhammed.

Hi

Even then there is no harm to study for peaceful Islam, if you agree.

Thanks

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

I don’t see how anyone could find problems with peace-loving Muslims wanting to live their lives free from persecution.

Who exactly has persecuted the Muslims?

 

[nonsumd]

The West, as I understand, due to certain disinformation has seen only MullahIslam or MullahShariah; the true face of peaceful and human loving Muhammad and his religion Islam and Islam of PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 is yet hidden from their eyes, which is truly speaking moral and peaceful.

So you are saying that non-Ahmadi Islam has been selling the world a false image of Muhammad?

The first forty years i.e. before Muhammad was appointed ProphetMessenger by GodAllahYHWH has been offered as a reasonable argument/challenge in Quran before Nonbelievers-of-Mecca, and they could not deny its truthfulness

All well and good, but are there not Qur’anic verses that instruct Muslims to subdue militarily unbelievers if they continue to reject the supremacy of Islam?

Muhammad had a marvelous record of a peace loving person for 40+13=53 years, he joined in welfare activities if there was any in Mecca, he helped the needy and in distress, he stood for the human cause, he never harmed any person. His record in these 53 years is clean by any standards.

So the accounts of Muhammad as waging war during part of his 13 years as a prophet are false?

And you know Jesus only lived from 23 to 33 years maximum as per the Catholics; who knows what he would have done to his enemies if he would have lived longer, only GodAllahYHWH knows.

What we know is that Jesus while being nailed to the cross asked God to forgive his enemies, those putting him to death.

Jesus asked his not so brave disciples to sell their clothes they were wearing and buy Swords; and Sword is not used in cutting vegetables in the kitchens, I think, everybody knows.

I am not sure what exact anecdote from Jesus’ life you are referring to here – you will have to cite your New Testament source on this.

I think the words of Jesus that “everyone knows” is ***“He who lives by the sword shall perish by the sword,” ***the words Jesus spoke to Peter to dissuade him from continuing to resist Jesus’ enemies with armed force (Peter had just cut off the ear of the High Priest’s servant).

Nevertheless, Muhammad was peaceful till the end of his life, only he is not understood correctly. Muhammad was a prince of peace, indeed.

Jesus was the Prince of Peace. That is the title applied to Him in the New Testament, and the New Testament shows Him never taking up arms (His kingdom “not being of this world”)

Muhammad definitely founded a state “of this world” and did so by force of arms (as well as through peaceful means). To recognize this fact about Muhammad is not necessarily to disrespect him: Moses, Joshua, David, and many other servants of God in the Jewish scriptures/Christian Old Testament were warriors and state-builders.

But in that regard, they were all different from Jesus. This comes as no surprise to a Christian, since we do not regard Jesus as merely a prophet.

paarsurrey, I am not pointing these non-arguments of yours to insult Islam or Ahmadiyya. I personally know many Muslims who truly love peace and are tolerant, and I have no problem recognizing that Muslims (and Jews) worship the same God that I as a Catholic worship when I worship God the Father. Abraham is indeed the father of us all in faith, and God’s mercy and compassion are stressed in all three of our religions.

That being said, in point of fact, Islam is not a religion of peace – and neither is Christianity or Judaism. The expression “religion of peace” often amounts to nothing more than “religion of passivity” in the face of the evil of the world, whereas I think all three religions enjoin us to struggle against the evil of the world.

I do not think any of the three religions categorically excludes the use of armed force as a means to wage that struggle, though I do not think anyone can deny that Jesus by both word and example came closest to doing that. (cont.)

 

[nonsumd]

(cont.)

**The crux of the problem is that all sides of the current conflicts, Muslim, Christian, and Jew, prefer to view themselves exclusively as victims and their opponents as victimizers, when the reality of history is far more complex than that. **

People in one context are oppressors are the oppressed in another. To take a very contemporary example, the Sunni extremists who have just massacred Yazidis in northern Iraq claim to act in the name of a Sunni community that sees itself as the victims of a US occupation and of Shi’a ethnic cleansing. To take another example, Lebanese Christians and Lebanese Shi’a both see themselves as vulnerable minorities that need to defend themselves even to the point of committing atrocities. And for a last example… Americans focus on those killed in the Twin Towers while hardly imagining that much of the rest of the world focuses on those who have been killed by bombs dropped by the US or its proxies. And so on and so on…

 

[dolphinlove]

Denial is not just a river in Egypt, as they say.

 

[Leopard]

…I am not sure what exact anecdote from Jesus’ life you are referring to here – you will have to cite your New Testament source on this…

He or she is refering to Luke 22:36.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Everyone should just admit right here they hardly know anything about Islam apart from what they hear on the news about the latest body count from the Middle East.

Speaking as an Eastern Christian, I can assure you that Islamophobia exists only because Christianophobia existed among Muslims first. Eastern Christians have a long history of dealing with Islam, and it’s not a pretty one.

You don’t hear anything on the news about the treatment of Christians in Iraq: the murder of priests, the bombing of churches, and even the beheading of Christian children. One such little martyr even had his body roasted and returned to his family on a bed of rice. (Such a wonderful, peaceloving religion.)

I suggest you visit these sites:

jihadwiatch.org

kaldu.org (the Chaldean Catholic diocese in the USA)

aina.com (Assyrian International News Agency, dealing with the Chaldeans and their non-Catholic counterparts, the Assyrian Church of the East)

mychristianblood.blogspirit.com/

and get informed.

 

[bpbasilphx]

<<Do you not know that there are many Muslims who despise all of this stuff [violence and suicide bombings]"

Then why don’t we hear the all the voices of moderate Muslims raised in denunciation of such violence?

Why have not imams and qadis issued fatwas against it?

Hmmmmmmmmmm???

 

[Palladio]

For Islamic persecution of Christians see barnabasfund.org/.

Last night I mistakenly referred to this as the Saint Barnabas Fund: it is saintly, but not yet a saint.

If anybody can substantially deny–as opposed to throwing around a cant term like Islamophobia–what the Fund represents, let him speak.

If not, we have to accept the overwhelming evidence on that site as reason to treat Islam with the greatest care.

Again, the West has little experience of Islam, and charitable as we all may be, the old school notion of Muslims worshipping the same god as we seems to have very little meaning.

God bless.

 

[Generic_Man]

<<Do you not know that there are many Muslims who despise all of this stuff [violence and suicide bombings]"

Then why don’t we hear the all the voices of moderate Muslims raised in denunciation of such violence?

Why have not imams and qadis issued fatwas against it?

Hmmmmmmmmmm???

There are.

They’re just never heard.

 

[nonsumd]

He or she is refering to Luke 22:36.

Oh, he’s referring to those verses…

Thanks for the heads up, Leopard!

Luke 22:36, not the most transparent passage, hardly constitutes evidence that Jesus was an advocate of the use of armed force (particularly if you keep “He who lives by the sword shall perish by the sword”) in mind (how would a literal “two swords” ever be sufficient?).

It seems to me that Jesus is just stressing that His being arrested and ultimately executed will make his disciples criminals (“counted among the lawless”) in the eyes of the authorities and they should not take granted their safety.

 

[famdigy]

<<Do you not know that there are many Muslims who despise all of this stuff [violence and suicide bombings]"

Then why don’t we hear the all the voices of moderate Muslims raised in denunciation of such violence?

Why have not imams and qadis issued fatwas against it?

Hmmmmmmmmmm???

Actually they are denounced all the time but they never make it to CNN or fox news. Here is one quote taken from al-islam.com website run by the ministry of Islamic affairs in Saudi Arabia. I have translated it from the original Arabic.

Dr. Ibrahim writes:

"The Islamic law on violence and terrorism is very clear; it is not permissible intellectually or in Islamic law to terrorize the peaceful population and to frighten them, and to lay siege on them making the highways unsafe, or threatening them as such. Whether they be Muslims or non-Muslims…even if frightening them is meant as in jest"
Source: terrorism, violence and extremism in the scale of Islamic law by Muhammad Ali Ibrahim, Electronic book Vol.1 Page 42. --> [HERE](http://alminbar.al-islam.com/Mehwar_erhabM.aspx?View=Page&PageID=8&PageNo=1&BookID=173&word=images/books/183.doc&pdf=images/books/183.pdf%20)

An interview about terrorism with American Muslim Hamza Yusuf
uga.edu/islam/hamza.html

This one made it to BBC UK.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/south_east/3659683.stm

Shaikh Hamza Yusuf on Jihad
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/south_east/3659683.stm

Sayyid Qazwini on moderate Islam
alulbayt.com/muh1427/video/2.wmv

It is clear that terrorism and violence are denounced by all schools of thought in Islam.

 

[Wolseley]

Blankley’s article is dead on-target, at least in the second paragraph:

"It would appear that the great divide in both public opinion and between politicians is not Republican-Democrat, liberal-conservative, pro or anti-Bush, or even pro or anti-war (or, in Europe: pro-or anti-American). Rather, the great divide is between those, such as me, who believe that the rise of radical Islam poses an existential threat to Western Civilization; and those who believe it is a nuisance, if, episodically, a very dangerous nuisance."

jewishworldreview.com/0407/blankley042507.php3

 

[Ecoclimber]

FORGIVE THE LARGE CAPS, I HAVE POOR VISION.I HAVE NO INTENT TO SHOUT BUT IT IS THE ONLY WAY I AM ABLE TO VIEW WHAT I AM WRITING.

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2668560761490749816
THE REASON I INSERTED THE LINK IS TO COUNTERACT THE MISCONCEPTION ON WHAT THE IMAMS ARE SAYING IN PUBLIC VERSUS WHAT THEY ARE PREACHING AND TEACHING THOUGHT OUT THE MOSQUES IN GREAT BRITAIN NOT JUST IN ONE MOSQUE NOR ONE IMAM. APPARENTLY FROM YOUR STATEMENT MAYBE YOU DIDN’T WATCH THE SAME OR ALL OF THE VIDEO?

FOR INSTANCE, THERE IS A STATEMENT FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF SAUDI ARABIA ON THE VIDEO AT 33.15 MINUTES CONCERNING THEIR DISALLOWANCE TO EXTREME AND RADICAL ISLAM AND THEIR RE-EDUCATION OF THEIR SCHOLARS AND IMAMS CONCERNING RADICAL ISLAM. YET, THIS IS REFUTED THROUGHOUT THE TAPE BY SHOWING DIRECT FINANCIAL SUPPORT FROM SAUDI ARABIA, THEIR SHEIKS AND RELIGIOUS ESTABLISHMENT AT 26.15, 26.45, 27.00, 27.39, 42.25, 47.41 MINUTES.

THEY ARE RECEIVE DIRECT TEACHING AND SUPPORT FROM THE ISLAMIC RELIGIOUS ESTABLISHMENT IN SAUDI ARABIA AT 41.18, 35.17 AND 25.09.

THE GRAND MUFTI OF SAUDI ARABIA, The Grand Mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
President of the Committee of Major Scholars and the Centre for Knowledge Based Research and Verdicts 'Abdul-Azeez bin Abdullaa bin Muhammad Aal ash-Shaikh EXPRESSED HIS REAL VIEWS ON ISLAM AT 6.98 MINUTES.

WHAT IS MOST DISTURBING IS THAT THE SO CALLED MUSLIM IMAMS WHO ARE CALLING FOR MULTI CULTURAL AND INTERFAITH DIALOGUE AMONG CHRISTIAN NON CHRISTIAN AND JEWISH BELIEVERS YET ARE TEACHING THEIR OWN BELIEVERS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT MESSAGE WITHIN THEIR MOSQUES. THESE SAME IMAMS WHO TALK ABOUT TOLERANCE IN THEIR MESSAGES TO GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS INCLUDING THE PRIME MINISTER AND TO RELIGIOUS LEADERS OF OTHER FAITHS AND TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE ARE IN FACT PERPETRATING A GREAT RELIGIOUS DECEPTION AND FRAUD. FURTHERMORE, THERE IS NO TOLERANCE OF OTHER RELIGIOUS VIEWS ALLOWED IN SAUDI ARABIA UNLIKE THE DEMOCRACIES OF THE WEST. WHY DOESN’T ISLAM ALLOW RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN THEIR COUNTRIES AS WE DO IN THE WEST?

IT IS NO DIFFERENT THEN THE STRATEGY THAT HITLER USED TO PROMOTE NAZISM AND ARYANISM TO SUPPORT HIS RISE TO POWER. HIS COMMENTS TO NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN SPEAKS VOLUMES ON HOW EVIL DECEIVES.

THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS AND WRITINGS OF THE APOSTLES AND ST. PAUL TO EARNESTLY CONTEND FOR THE FAITH. THEY WROTE EXTENSIVELY AGAINST OTHER IDEOLOGIES AND HERETICAL TEACHING THROUGHOUT THE AGES.

ISLAM PEACEFUL READ?
READ THE Quran especilly verses Q5:34,Q2:216,Q3:118,Q9:29,Surah 9:73 need I say more?

25 July 2007

BERLIN (AP) – Pope Benedict XVI’s private secretary warned of the Islamization of Europe and stressed the need for the continent’s Christian roots not to be ignored, in comments released Thursday.

‘‘Attempts to Islamize the west cannot be denied,’’ Monsignor Georg Gaenswein was quoted as saying in an advance copy of the weekly Sueddeutsche Magazin to be published Friday.

‘‘The danger for the identity of Europe that is connected with it should not be ignored out of a wrongly understood respectfulness,’’ the magazine quoted him as saying.

Gaenswein also defended a speech Benedict gave last year linking Islam and violence, saying it was an attempt by the pontiff to ‘‘act against a certain naivety.’’

 

[Palladio]

“‘Rather, the great divide is between those, such as me, who believe that the rise of radical Islam poses an existential threat to Western Civilization; and those who believe it is a nuisance, if, episodically, a very dangerous nuisance.’”

I would say both claims are true: episodes easily change into continuity. But what battle was it again that turned the tide against Islam in early modern Europe? How threatening was the Ottoman Empire and for how long?

If anybody thinks democracy and Islam mix, look at a map of the Middle East and point to a single Islamic democracy.

If anybody thinks liberal values mix with Sharia law, point to a place anywhere on the globe where this is generally the case.

 

[Truth]

Not just on Non-Catholic Religions, but what feels like every single board people are saying how all muslims are violent people who want to take over the world.

Because this is essentially a fact. To believe otherwise is simply foolhardy. How many suicide bombers are Christians doing it in the name of Christ?