jump to navigation

The Hajj is Peaceful, but is Islam? 9 December, 2006

Posted by paralleldivergence in Brad & Phil, education, God, Islam, My Thoughts, Political Correctness.
trackback

The largest pilgrimage in the world happens every year during the days of Hajj. From almost every country on Earth, about two and a half million Muslims, many of whom can barely afford to pay for the trip, will make what is one of their “duties” in life – a pilgrimage to Mecca, Saudi Arabia.  With the Islamic calendar based around lunar months, the period of Hajj occurs at different times of the year relative to the more common twelve-month calendar, and coincidentally, this year it is just after Christmas.

The Hajj

Most Westerners understand very little about the Islamic faith. In a religious sense, the word Islam means submission (to God’s will and word). It is not simply a case of worshipping Allah (God), it is a way of life.  Most people are aware of the Muslim’s requirement to pray five times a day at specific times, but many do not know that it is a requirement to perform the prayers in Arabic, by heart, even if Arabic is not the Muslim’s native tongue.

Every Muslim is obliged to contribute charity on an annual basis to the poor and needy, based on a fixed proportion (about 2.5%) of their wealth. During the month of Ramadan, Muslims must abstain from any food, drink or sex each day from dawn until dusk. These acknowledgements and rituals represent the first four Pillars of Islam. The fifth and final Pillar is that at least once in each person’s lifetime, they must make the pilgrimage to Mecca during Hajj to retrace the steps of Muhammad, Islam’s 7th century prophet.

The entire city of Mecca is considered a holy site in Islam and Islamic law strictly forbids any non-Muslims from visiting. Punishment is death for those caught violating this law. Yet regardless of this harsh consequence, the actual pilgrimage is representative of the largest and most peaceful mass-gathering anywhere on the planet with pilgrims of all nationalities, ages, and colors coming together. The population of the city of Mecca quadruples during Hajj with hundreds of thousands taking up all available accommodation and the rest living in giant tent cities almost on top of each other.  Each day during Hajj is a mass-movement of bodies from one ritual to the next – the logistics of the operations must be incredible, yet patience and tolerance take over and understanding for the fellow man sees each operation through to successful completion. And this cycle repeats every single year.

So why does this seemingly very peaceful and well-organised religion have such a bad reputation in the West?  Hajj is the single biggest regular event in humanity and it’s a truly spiritual and peaceful event. I can’t see any other organised religion or nation reproducing such an event so successfully. All I can imagine is riots and total havoc. Westerners could never gather in such numbers and expect similar results to the Hajj. The problem with Islam however, is the tolerance and patience it shows to other Muslims of other nationalities is not extended in any way to any non-Muslims. The total exclusion of non-Muslims from Mecca is evidence of this. A follower of Islam is a Muslim first. Nationalities mean little to most Muslims. Islam’s goal is to create Muslim Nations – all in the name of Allah. The West is careful to point out the differences between hardline, or extremist and moderate Muslims, but if it came down to a battle (as it has in Iraq and Afghanistan), most moderate Muslims would side with the hardliners than the West. Islam instructs this.

Then there’s the real cause of the problem – the leaders of religion. If a Muslim chose to individually live their lives according to the five pillars of Islam, they would be the most peaceful and caring groups of individuals on Earth. But Islamic schools in some of the poorest and most heavily populated countries have little interest in teaching mathematics and science. Their aim is to spread the word of the Qu’ran, or in reality, their interpretation of the word of the Qu’ran to young minds that eagerly soak up in many cases words of hate against non-Muslims.

Some Muslims however, have taken the time to look beyond the blinkers applied by the leaders of their religion and put together Faith Freedom International. This website has been banned by many Muslim Nations because it dares to question the Qu’ran. With its slogan, “Where logic fails to open the mind, compassion may open the heart”, Faith Freedom stands for freedom of faith. They are against Hate, not Faith. They revere human rights not human beliefs. They endeavor to be factually correct, not politically correct. Every Muslim should at least be allowed to read the information at their site. Unfortunately, most Muslims cannot.

As I wrote in the article, Which is Stronger, Godfluence or Manfluence?, Manfluence is all about control – control of entire populations for the benefit of individuals. Islam controls exceptionally well.

Brad & Phil #11

Comments»

1. Clancy of the overfow - 9 December, 2006

All religions are voodoo as far as I am concerned. Watch out, or you may end up like Salman Rush To Die.

May your god go with you!

Cheers.

imran - 29 January, 2011

Thanks For Sharing.

Faith Of Muslims!

I Like Your Post

2. shift - 10 December, 2006

your entire post seems decently researched, except the part about qur’anic interpretation. if you have actually researched islamic sciences, then you probably know that there’s an entire study dedicated to understanding the ideas, themes, and wisdom behind the words in the qur’an.

hence, by discussing ONE minor opinion of certain “scholars” that “legitimizes” violence through extreme literal interpretation, you have absolved the other more respectable opinions of balancing literal interpretation with figurative reasoning.

this study is known as the sciences of the qur’an. i advise you to research that in more detail, as you seem to have missed some major points.

nevertheless, it’s a good post, just try to keep it valid next time.

3. paralleldivergence - 10 December, 2006

Hi Shift,

Thanks for the comments. Speaking as a Westerner, my main argument is about the influence of Man on the word of God. I really believe that if there are Muslims that disagree with some of the leaders of their faith, they should not be afraid to raise their heads and defend Islam and denounce the hardliners. Your pure religion is being misrepresented by these few extremists and the sooner the “moderates” stand up, the sooner Islam will be acceptable by the West.

If you have something specific you can add to this discussion, please do. I don’t think it should be up to those in the West to study Qu’ranic Sciences to try to change their view. They need positive discussion and action from Muslims. Does that sound reasonable?

4. GreenLantern - 10 December, 2006

Very enlightening. Being from the West, I think I have a slightly skewed view on the word “Muslim” thanks to the media and their campaign of fear.

I like the new look by the way.

5. paralleldivergence - 10 December, 2006

Thanks GreenLantern, I worked hard on the new ‘do. :)

6. muslem - 11 December, 2006

I find myself I have to disagree.

Reason of all these problems is simply goes back to the end of WW1 when the Uthuman Empire which took the side of Germany was chopped mainly by France Britain and Russia. Russians established the soviet union on Russia, Kazakhistan, Azarbeegan, Armenia,.. Russians killed the inhabitants who were mainly muslems and obliged them to move out to Siberia, please, check history of Chenia regarding this. French colonised North Africa Lebanon Syria, Britain colonised almost all the gulf countraies, Iraq, Egypt, Jordan and Palestine. Italy took Lybia.

1956 was the end of Britain & France direct influence in the middle-east after the Russians threatened to bombard London & Paris with nuclear missiles if they carry on in their attack on Egypt.. War of 1956 & Swaiss channel.

Isenhawar introduced his famous principal (To fill the gap) meaning filling the gap left by the absence of Britain & French influence. The american presence started in the area by establishing puppet governments in the region. These puppet regimes are still existing till now and practicing dictatorships in its ugliest shapes against the people in the region who are mainly muslems.

People in the region consider the western powers the reason for all the massacre they suffer directly or indirectly, i.e. on the hands of the puppets.

As an example, please, observe the French support for the Chadian ruler these days against the resistance in that land. All this support from France because the ruler is obtaining reliable oil flow from Chad. This oil is simply sucked by the french oil companies there!

All the middle east and whole Africa used to be in the past inhabitants by muslems. All these lands are very rich of resources: for example Kazakhistan contains %30 of the world’s Uranium. Middle-east, Sudan (Darfur) is very rich with oil. This explains the *humanity* of the west to take care of the problems in Darfur, while they left a million people in Rawanda to be killed without caring.

This opens a big struggle between the western powers themselves: for example U.S. & France are competing to take control of Darfur. and between these powers & the inhabitants who are mainly muslems.

Of course, these Hypocrate super powers need to show themselves as very human and to show the ones who are colonised as savages and not-civilised. This clearly appeared in Majillan’s statement when he faced muslems in Philippino (I think) a few hundreds years back when he said they they are the *white race* and that they are the civilised high class and they should take control of the region. The war started between the two parties. Muslems under the leadership of LaboLabo defeated Majillan’s army, arrested Majillan & executed him.

The story goes on & on thru the history till our days….

Please, try to find really good reliable histrical books and info on net.

Truth really needs a lot of effort to be spent in order to be found these days I’m afraid.

Islam refuses for a muslem to be ruled by rules other than what we believe rules of God. While clearly western powers want to drag us away from our belief/faith. All their policies in all regions reflect nothing but this. Their support to puppet government that adopt the western rules, their attack for any Islamic move to liberate people, all this is clear now for people.

As for Iraq, I think this says it clearly:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=HAS20061207&articleId=4071.

All this of course, after about 1.5 million lost their lives during the *United Nations very human!! sanctions against Iraq*

Good Luck…

7. paralleldivergence - 11 December, 2006

I’m not sure what exactly you disagreed to in the article muslem as I didn’t raise any of the points you referred to. I don’t see which western powers want to drag you away from your belief/faith. If they were any anyway successful, Islam wouldn’t be the fastest growing religion in the world. Did you get a chance to read the Faith Freedom website I linked to in the article?

8. Neurocentric - 11 December, 2006

Very interesting. Visa permitting, I will be going to Hajj myself next week, if God wills.

By the way, I completely disagree with your post “How Hubble Killed God… ” as you’d appreciate from my article 13.7 billion years back in June:

http://neurocentric.blogspot.com/2006/06/137-billion-years.html

But it was interesting all the same.

9. shift - 12 December, 2006

oh wow. so much feedback.

anyway, you asked for a detailed answer…

there’s a reason why “muslem” mentioned the geopolitical history of the muslim world. it shows how the western powers want to have an influence in the power plays of muslim countries. if you analyze the current political situations of many of the main muslim countries, you’ll see that there are many dedicated connections to western powers. now, how does this tie in to western powers trying to “remove” islam?

if you, again, analyze the terminology and actions used and displayed by the western leaders, you’ll realize that it is indeed an attack on the ideology of islam itself. their definition of extremism/moderation/terrorist are so vague and general, that they could apply it to practically anyone, including their own respective people. just look at the loss of civil rights in the united states.

it’s not that muslims are denying that islam is the fastest growing religion, it’s the fact that it is being defamed for no reason other than its beliefs. that is discriminatory and humanely wrong.

referring to the labeling…

for these leaders, the moderates refer to anyone who agrees with them and is not practicing (ie, not praying regularly). their definition of extremist is anyone who does not agree with them and practices islam. as for their definition of a terrorist, it’s far too vague. not only that, terrorist is inherently a relative word. the one who terrorizes does not see himself as a terrorist nor do his supporters deem him a terrorist.

also, going back to your previous comment about the qur’anic sciences, i mentioned it because the “opinion” you mentioned in your post is a minor and controversial (even among the islamic scholars). i only suggested that you research a little bit deeper if you’re going to mention that opinion and forget the other, more sound opinions.

finally, the site that you posted. i looked through it. it seems it is maintained by ex-muslims. as with all sites made by muslim apostates, they seem emotionally charged and they seem to lack any arguments. why do i say this? because, for the majority of these people, they left islam because they went through an ordeal that was traumatizing for them and they blamed islam for it, not realizing that God puts us through various tests for our benefit. basically, it’s a sign of lack of faith in the wisdom of God and trusting in His Judgement. I don’t want to get into a discussion on fate, or ‘qadr’, in islam. also, they apply man-made rules to a world that is not built on that. one would not apply human physiological concepts to a toy man.

in essence, the site that you posted is one of a few that i’ve come across that really make me pity them. they seem to put so much effort into disprove islam, when that same effort could’ve been direct towards trying to understand their lives and their belief in God.

forgive me if that sounds preachy.

i hope i was clear in my thoughts. i have a tendency to run off on tangents, but this is, i think, suffices.

10. lolipop - 12 December, 2006

Hellloooo;

I think this x-dancer disagrees:

http://www.amin.org/look/amin/en.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=7&NrArticle=38348&NrIssue=1&NrSection=3

“Eventually I hit a moment of truth: my new-found self-fulfilling activism was nothing more than merely embracing a faith called Islam where I could live in peace as a “functional” Muslim.”

and freedom too:

” one thing was remarkably distinct–I was not–nor was the peace at being a woman I experienced for the very first time. I felt as if the chains had been broken and I was finally free.”

Again, peaceful:
“A year-and-a-half passed, and I told my husband I wanted to wear Niqab. My reason, this time, was that I felt it would be more pleasing to Allah, the Creator, increasing my feeling of peace at being more modest.”

Kind regards.

11. tobeme - 12 December, 2006

Very interesting. Thank-you for the education on Islam. As you said, the basic tennants of the faith are good, as most religions are. It’s the leadership that tends to muck things up. Man can interpet anything he wants to fit the needs of the moment.

12. paralleldivergence - 12 December, 2006

Hi shift,

From your response, I think you believe that there is absolutely nothing wrong with how Islam is being practiced around the world and the entire blame for any conflict lies with the West. I disagree with you that Western leaders believe that “moderate” Muslims are not practicing Muslims and “extremists” are practicing Muslims. I believe that’s an internal belief spread by some in the Muslim community without real basis. Just like I know a few Muslims closely who tell me that in their mosques there have been discussions that 9/11 was perpetrated by Jews and that the Bali bombings were actually caused by a missile from a US submarine off the coast of Indonesia. Both clearly ridiculous, but both spread as fact internally.

The moderates are the ones that dispute these claims.

13. shift - 13 December, 2006

i’m not saying that islam is being perfectly practiced. in fact, unfortunately, most of the muslims don’t even the most basic rules of islam, such as what to believe in, how to pray, etc.

and, i guess i wasn’t clear in my post. i’m not blaming the west for everything. i’m blaming them for the retarded view of islam they have propagated to the western societies.

i totally understand where you’re coming from about what western leaders believe about moderates and extremists. however, it’s a common misconception among the western people. i’ve been in many communities that are simply “under watch” because it’s a big and active community.

here’s an example.

if a muslim man has a beard or a muslim woman is wearing the hijaab/niqaab (headscarf/full headdress), they are labeled extremist. why? they are not doing anything except following what God commanded them to do. they are simply practicing their faith. but, to westerners, they are extremists.

however, if the muslim man has no beard, he’s “more tolerant, open minded, and modern”. if the muslim woman is not wearing the scarf, she’s “free, not oppressed, and equal to men”.

what kind of logic is this?

simply, they wish to change the rules of islam, futile those attempts may be. they wish to change it through fear, threats, and bullying.

as for the 9/11 discussions, considering how “truthful” and “open” the current us administration is, i will hold my final judgement about the truth until later. you might say that’s ridiculous, but a conspiracy is a theory if there are certain evidences hinting at a deeper story. but, that’s another topic for another time.

finally, the moderates you refer to are probably not the same ones i’m referring to. this is because of our definitions of the term. hence, before getting into this debate, i strongly suggest defining the terms.

14. muslem - 13 December, 2006

Hello;

Ooh! sorry that I took it implicitly in a political context.

Well, I think that different things have different meanings and impressions for different people. You said Hajj is peaceful. For me as a muslem who performed Hajj, it is patience, patience, and still more patience in being within about 3 million people from all world in a very limited place. It is also a reminder of the resurrection day, when all mankind get resurrected and start preparations for their judgement. It is also a declaration of sacrificing anything for my islamic values: this is actually come up when we do stoning in area called ‘Mina': this is imitation to what prophet Abraham, peace be upon him, his son, and his wife performed when they stoned Evil when Evil came to whisper to them.

The peaceful part lies in the part that we are not allowed during the Hajj time to do any types of hunting animals which is easy these days while I don’t think it was in the past. Peaceful also lies in the forbidding of arguements because it decreases and could spoil the reward of Hajj.

Therefore, I would say that your impression about the Hajj that it looks peaceful for you.

Now is Islam? This is, I’m afraid, does not look a valid question. Do you mean peaceful for humanbeing’s soul, or for others.

Islam gives the real believer in its values, the faithful: peace inside his heart and, of course, it reflects in his deeds as a part from other many good behaviours and morals the faithful has: one of these behaviours is to enjoy the good and to forbid the evil: to say and help every good and take paths lead to increase the good morals and behaviours by people around him and Not to do himself any mischief and to try his best to stop any evil doing happens around him by other people. Faithful person has also to become very angry when he sees the rules of God get violated or when he sees any mischief.

Now, not all muslems at one level of faith, but they (very generally speaking), still share the believing in God, The teachings say they shall be mercyful and excusing for shortenings of each others and of course helpfull towards good as said before.

Is islam peaceful towards, non-muslems? Well. Islam claissifies non-muslems in the context of their view towards Islam in 2 classes: Enemy who declares and helps every cause to attack Islam by word, by money, by killing muslems, by spreading mischief and bad behaviours and bad morals, or by helping any enemy of Islam who does in its place any of the above.

The second type is people of pledge. Those are non-muslems who have agreement with muslems that they don’t attack islam/muslems directly or indirectly. In return, muslems give them peace in themselves (i.e. not to get harmed by muslems), their families, and their properties: money, house,…

Regarding the website faith freedom. Well, since as a muslim I look to things from an islamic perspective, we have our own version of faith freedom: Muslems are not allowed, by a Quran statement, under any reason to oblige any person to become muslim, and actually, the nature of the islamic message: To free people from worshipping creatures to worshipping creator emphasize this point since the one who holds this mission: muslems need really to be totally convinced and believe in the message. Otherwise, they will not be successful in delivering this message to humanity.Therefore, obliging a person to believe in a message then expecting from him/her to deliver it to humanity will not be successful.

Regards

15. shift - 13 December, 2006

well said.

16. paralleldivergence - 13 December, 2006

Hi shift and Muslem,

OK, to define some terms. Let’s just cut it down to Extremists and Moderates. I’ll lump Extremists and Hardliners together. I believe an extremist commits terrorist acts in the name of Islam, but a hardliner supports and applauds those terrorist acts without necessarily doing.

Islamic Extremist: One who follows the Qu’ran literally, but also skews interpretations. One who believes it is right to kill others for such acts as (but not limited to) drawing a cartoon about the Prophet; threatening to leave Islam; being a Jew; a non-Muslim visiting Mecca; a Muslim daughter who wishes to marry a non-Muslim; a muslim woman who is raped, but stoned for adultery; highjacking and flying planes into buildings; suicide bombings in a nightclub.

Islamic Moderate: One who practices Islam but understands that killing others is wrong. One who is prepared to denounce those who denigrate Islam by perpetrating acts of terror. These people:

http://www.ijtihad.org/

One child born in Brazil is naturally raised Roman Catholic. He had no choice in childhood. He was forced to church, to practice the rosary and to confess his sins. If he chooses in adulthood to turn to Islam, should his parents kill him?

A child is born in Pakistan and raised as a traditional Muslim. He has no choice in childhood. He is forced to pray five times a day, goes to maktab, fasts during Ramadan. In adulthood he chooses to turn to Catholicism. Should his parents and community kill him?

Muslem, you say: “Muslims are not allowed, by a Quran statement, under any reason to oblige any person to become muslim”. What about the children of Muslims? Do they have any free will or choice about their religion?

May Peace be with us all.

17. muslim - 14 December, 2006

Hello;

Please, refer to what ‘shift’ said in previous posts. It is also clear the confusion that the media caused. terrorist/moderate/extremist/fundementalist all these expressions are CIA & RAND bluprint.

I will try to answer some and you need to make more research…

A believer, whether a muslem or non muslem, is a person who believes in a set of values and principals and he is ready to sacrifice: time, effort, hardship, even blood for his values. For example, Ernesto Chi Givara was a strong believer of communism. Now, the question is: if some western person believed in a set of western values(Individuality, democracy,…) and went around the world fighting to broadcast these values and sacrificed his life for these values by doing deadly operations which threat his life, or may be what you called a suicide bombing. Would he be considered a terrorist?

So, islam teaches a person that it is his sacred right to defend himself/his property/his faith even againt a muslem ruler who excercises dictatorship. How about when an Abu Ghraib prisonner manages, by God’s will, to be released after he was raped, they killed his kids infront of him, as a way of torturing (what western media had shown is just a drop of water in a sea of what really happend), they raped & killed his wife. What is expected from this person?! and when this same person has also lost some parent during the UN sanctions, what is expected from him!!?? Give a hugg?

On the otherhand, it is really sarcastic when some western media introduces a piece of news that some country has *failed* to allign with some USA (Oh, I mean UN, never mind, UN is just a branch of USA!) resolution, while this resolution is not implemented in the first place by the bunch of countries that enforced it and they actually excercised breaking it day-in day-out. The media is really driving the people.

Let’s move on: In islam it is not allowed to impersonate or moke on any messenger. Western movies for prophet jesus, peace be upon him, are prohibited in Islamic countries, this is not as an exchange of respect with western countries, no, but because we muslems believe in all messengers and it is considered a type of moking with God when moking on His respectful messengers.

Being a jew?? This is not true!! There are jews in yemen, morocco, syria, iraq, and other islamic countries living a normal life. Please, refer to “Mohammad’s sword” article written by a jew on this link for a glimpse of truth: http://www.avnery-news.co.il/english/

Muslim daughter wishes to marry a non-Muslim: muslems, as said before, believe in all messengers, while christians believe in Jesus, Jews believe in Moses, therefore, in Islam it is allowed for the muslem man (man is considered to be the head of the family and responsible for sheltering,…) to marry christians/jews (practicing ones not ones who just tagged as christias/jews). While muslem woman (since she believes in all messengers) is not allowed to marry a man who believes in only part of messengers. These are rules in islam same as a rule who steal go to prison in western countries. an Islamic state is a state that applies the islamic rulings extracted from Quran and the sayings of the prophet as I said in my first post. As you see here, that non-muslems are indulging themselves with Islamic teachings while muslems don’t do that: they don’t say anything for example on the claimed saying for Jesus, peace be upon him, If you don’t have a sword, sell your coat to buy one! Muslems don’t indulge themselves in other faiths teachings. They don’t say why a jewish woman has to shave her head bold when married or why she’s considered as a part of the belongings of her husband.

muslim woman who is raped, but stoned for adultery. Do you really really believe any system whether islam or another does so for a victim?? This is a propaganda that was fabricated by Pakistani authorities and was broadcasted by the media: pakistani & western in order to help puppet musharraf to pass some constitutional changes in pakistani laws. Check Quran and sayings of prophet Muhammad if you don’t believe. (You can do google for: bukhari english in order to have your hands on a soft copy of authenticated sayings for prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him in english. By the way, I really recommend to look in that book on section: signs of the doomed day, or signs of the judgement day, I think you will get amazed from the signs that we are seeing many of them these days.

What you referred to as a moderate: Ijtihad, is not a group or authority, it is actually a principal in Islam. Ijtihad is an arabic word that holds an islamic meaning that muslem scholars look into new things that there is no islamic ruling about it in quran or the sayings of the prophet and, by comparison, provide an islamic ruling. For example (this is just from my mind), is car allowed to be used? muslem scholars compare it to horses, then they say that yes. Is vodka allowed to drink? muslem scholars compare it to any alcoholic drink, and gives the answer: No.

About a child in Brasil,…., the answer is ‘INVESTIGATE!’ as you got in a previous post. Please, observe what quran says, and compare it with the post you received formerly. God says:

Section 10 verses87, People of pharoah to Moses, peace be upon him, say:
“They said: Have you come to us to turn us away from what we found our fathers upon, and (that) greatness in the land should be for you two? And we are not going to believe in you.”

Section 14 verse 10:the story of People of Noah peace be upon him:
“Their messengers said: Is there doubt about Allah, the Maker of the heavens and the earth? He invites you to forgive you your faults and to respite you till an appointed term. They said: You are nothing but mortals like us; you wish to turn us away from what our fathers used to worship; bring us therefore some clear authority.”

God knows best.

Peace..

18. shift - 15 December, 2006

again, well said, muslim. i’d just like to add a few things…

parallel divergence: you lumped extremist and hardliners together, yet they have a significant difference between them. hardliners are simply followers, they have very little, if any, knowledge of the islamic sciences and basic islamic beliefs in general. these are the people who just follow the most controversial opinion just to be known or garner attention. they really don’t care about following islam correctly.

your definition of extremist is the standard one that the media has provided so conveniently to western society.

an extremist is not one who takes the qur’an literally (as they are many righteous scholars who do). you are correct in your understanding that they do skew interpretations. they mold the meaning of the religious texts to fit their agenda and get some trumped-up “sheikh” to support their argument. the sheikh, or scholar, is not very knowledgeable in the fields required for a fatwa, or legal ruling, such as usool al-fiqh (principles of jurisprudence), fiqh (islamic jurisprudence), usool al-hadeeth (principles of the prophet’s (pbuh) narrations), hadeeth (narrations), seerah (biographies of the prophet (pbuh) and his companions), uloom al-qur’an (study of the qur’an), etc.

these are the simple basics one must have, in addition to a legal permission by a prominent sheikh, to issue a legal verdict.

it is a rule within islam, ordained by Allah, that a muslim woman should not marry a non-muslim man. first off, as muslims, an order from Allah is to be followed unconditionally. we do not ask questions simply because the one who created us knows what’s best for us. secondly, fortunately, the wisdom was revealed to us. in a household, the law of the husband is followed. therefore, if the husband is a non-muslim, then the children will be, legally, non-muslim. as Allah has made islam his final religion upon all of humanity, He wants islam to thrive (proof being it is still the fastest growing religion in the world).

i’m mentioning the reason not to appease anyone’s conscience. i want to convey the wisdom behind the law of Allah. it helps in understanding the comprehensive lifestyle that islam is.

your definition of moderate is far too general. a moderate practices islam, but to what extent? is he following all of the 5 pillars? also, if he denounces killing, does that include death sentences of murderers?

in islam, you have to realize that Allah has again ordained punishment for various crimes. a person who murders another should be, by law, murdered as well. however, the victim’s family may choose to forgive him. however, if a parent murders their child, s/he is forbidden to be killed as a punishment. why? because s/he has to live through the grief and guilt of killing his child.

do you understand the wisdom in this?

as for your comment about raising children with faith, the child, in any legal system, is not responsible. so, why make a big deal out of it with islam or any religion? if you wish to teach your children the choice of choosing religion, then so be it. if he chooses islam, will you prevent your child from doing so?

as for killing someone who leaves islam, that rule is applied only when an islamic state and a leader for the muslims is present. by islamic state, i mean 100% of the islamic rulings are implemented, along with the various principles that are used to derive new rulings based on unique situations (usool al-fiqh).

you referred to the ijtihad site. “muslim’s” response was good. i’d just like to clarify. the example he gave of is qiyas (analogical reasoning). it is just one of the tools used in ijtihad. there are many. i’m explaining this because ijtihad, again, is a process, a methodology used by only qualified scholars (not just any scholar, as it is apparent these days) in certain circumstances that call for it.

you have to realize that islam is not simply a ritualistic faith that one does then goes about his daily life. no, islam incoporates every single aspect of life within it. it teaches how to eat, drink, change our clothes, clean ourselves, conduct ourselves with others (muslims & non-muslims), practice our faith, and more. no other religion has this much on the follower’s personal lifestyle. hence, this is why Allah referred to islam as His deen. deen, commonly mistranslated, means religion, faith. however, a more correct translation would be “way of life”.

i hope that clarifies some of the issues.

in the end, Allah knows best.

19. adam - 15 December, 2006

Shift, you said “…islam incoporates every single aspect of life within it. it teaches how to eat, drink, change our clothes, clean ourselves, conduct ourselves with others (muslims & non-muslims), practice our faith, and more. no other religion has this much on the follower’s personal lifestyle.” As a Christian, I would respectfully disagree.

Parallel Divergence, a question: you said, “A follower of Islam is a Muslim first. Nationalities mean little to most Muslims.” My question is, if a person claims to be devoted to a God (Allah, Jesus, whomever) and he/she believes that God to be the literal center of the universe, would it not naturally follow that devotion to that God should supercede all other devotions? Shouldn’t we expect a Muslim to be a Muslim first? A Christian to be a Christian first? And so on…

I know that many Americans have a hard time with this. Of course, we (collectively) falsely believe ours to be a Christian nation, so we see no reason to split hairs over who we are more devoted to–God or country. But what if Jesus’ commands collide with America’s agenda? To whom do I pledge my allegience then?

All that to say, I don’t agree with Muslims, but I do admire their devotion. Fierce devotion is not a bad thing…if you are devoted to the right thing.

20. paralleldivergence - 15 December, 2006

Shift, I’d argue that the parent who kills his child for leaving Islam or marrying a non-Muslim not being punished is a cop-out. These people believe they are completely right to do what they did and probably did it out of rage, not some conscious decision to calmly plot and kill their child. I think they probably would feel little remorse. Hence, no punishment, hence justification of their actions in the first place.

Both you and Muslem skimmed over the whole issue of Muslims taking their own justice in the most extreme form. If we are all going to be judged by Allah for our deeds during life, what right has Man to make that judgement based on some false interpretation? Or is it not a false interpretation? Does Islam actually say Man must murder people for committing these “atrocities”? Can you see nothing wrong with this?

As for other religions and their “strange” rituals and beliefs, as long as they don’t kill people in the name of their religion, they are tolerable.

21. shift - 15 December, 2006

adam: from my knowledge, no religion has rulings as detailed as those in islam concerning each aspect of life. i’m talking about religious texts (with the qur’an directly from Allah) explicitly outlining these said ruliings. i’m not referring to what various men of religion have deduced from texts that have been inspired by men.

parallel divergence: the very fact that you’re arguing leads me to believe you think you know more about justice than the One who created mankind, including you and i. i sense that you think that humans know what’s best for them, yet the situation in today’s society directly contradicts that.

“muslem” and i have answered to your question about man taking justice in the most extreme form. killing innocent people is forbidden in islam, i think that’s a well-established belief and you can find countless proofs of that in the qur’an and the sunnah (sayings and actions of the prophet (pbuh)).

it’s true that Allah will judge us based on our deeds during the day of judgement, however, that’s on the individual level. He has also commanded man carry out the punishment for the crimes people commit on the societal level (in an islamic state). when justice is served via capital punishment, public lashes, etc.

how can you say it’s a false interpretation? are you an islamic scholar? have you mastered the sciences i mentioned in my previous post? i mean no disrespect, but the one who has knowledge should be giving out rulings on what’s accepted and what isn’t.

i see nothing wrong with criminals being punished. however, again, if an innocent life is taken, then that is forbidden and worthy of punishment.

in any case, those who want to learn about islam must realize that muslim believe that Allah created them, then He, as the Creator, knows what’s best. it is our duty, as the creation, to submit fully to His Laws. otherwise, there’s nothing except disgrace for the entire humanity (as it’s so obvious these days).

and Allah knows best.

22. paralleldivergence - 15 December, 2006

Thanks shift (and muslem and everyone else), I’m happy to leave it at that. It’s been a fair discussion and readers can make up their own minds. Everyone is entitled to their own point of view. Fortunately we’ve been able to keep it civil and not take things personally. There is hope for us all.

P.S. I hope you liked the new cartoon I had made for this article (the background is from the very funny movie Life of Brian). :)

23. shift - 15 December, 2006

thanks for having an open mind. it’s rare to come across people like that :-)

and my apologies if i’ve offended anyone.

looking forward to future posts.

24. moslem - 16 December, 2006

Hi again;

I don’t think I can agree with ‘Shift’ regarding extremist,moderate,… because, simply, all these expressions did NOT come out at all in Quran but from US first, then the puppet rulers adopted these terms and started broadcasting them, but still couldn’t:,i.e. people in islamic world don’t accept them. The reason is simply because these definitions are not anywhere in the quran and the sayings of the prophet and because all people in islamic countries can see crystal clear the atrocities and genocides done by the *civilised* world. They also aiming for a state that broadcast the real civilised values like the ones left in Andalusia/Spain which is a solid proof for all humanity what an Islamic civilisation is. Not like Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and secret prisons under ground in Yemen, Jordan, and several other countries which are also solid proof of what *civilised* world civilisation is.

If extremist is the one who tweaks the Quran & sayings of the prophet as you said ‘shift’, then, I believe it would be applied first on the religious assistants of the puppet rulers.They seem to do something like the church-kings alliances happened in Europe in the middle-ages and leaded to revolutions, secularism, and separation between the state & church. However, Islam is different in that the scholar is not holy/sacred and if he tries to wave tail for dictators, muslems dump him down straight away.

Paralleldivergence! the ansewer that I tried to post was longer than the one showed. However, it seems there is some size limitation in the website that couldn’t let me to post it all, therefore, I needed to remove many important things.

Somebody said that since their belief is not causing a threat to others, then they can do whatever they like. Well, in many occasions, US has introduced the point of ‘liberating women’ for example as a motive to launch attacks or perform operations. So, the issues that you mentioned were highlighted on the media and reflected in your post.

OK then, thank you and again, my last word is “INVESTIGATE!”.

25. Digital Hell - 23 December, 2006

Thanks for an interesting discussion and good to see all commenters keep it civil (sadly, a rare occurence in such discussions nowadays). Shift & ‘Muslim’, couldn’t have said it better myself!

26. Ebrahim Rashid - 23 December, 2006

Interesting article. However, there are certain things to be taken into account. Firstly, please DO NOT judge Islam by looking at the Muslims. Islam is one thing and Muslims is another thing.

Secondly, there are countless sects amongst Islam. All the Muslims are unanimous in accepting that the holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his immaculate progeny) said, “After my death, Muslims are going to be divided into 73 (seventy three) sects. Of these, only ONE will go to paradise and all the rest will be thrown into the hellfire.”

Let alone the so called “Muslims” mistreating fellow human beings because of their beliefs and practices. These wild beasts have the audacity to go out and kill fellow Muslims (who do not accept their interpretation of the holy Qur’an and their version of Islam) in the mosques, in the holy month of Ramadan and that too in the state of performing their prayers!

Can anyone ask these hellish wild animals to provide any kind of evidence from the Book of God, the holy Qur’an or the teachings of the holy Prophet (pbuhf) for treating fellow human beings in such a way? In essence, these are the sworn enemies of Islam and the Muslims.

It seems these animals who terrorise people in the name of Allah and Islam are the direct descendants of the murderers of Imam Husein (peace be upon him) who killed the grandson of the holy Prophet and his family including a six month old baby, hungry and thirsty in the plains of Kerbala in 61 A.H. Imam Husein and his companions and family members were brutally butchered in mere FIFTY YEARS time after the holy Prophet (pbuhf) parted from this world!

In order to understand pure Islam, please go the twelve true and Rightful successors of the holy Prophet who were from amongst his descendants.

27. josh - 23 December, 2006

this is a nice article. being an expatriate filipino roman catholic living in jakarta, i’ve learned that islam is a religion that preaches peace. terrorist twist the interpretation of the koran to suit their own ends.

28. geekrawk - 23 December, 2006

Anyway, the Hajj is only a duty upon those who can afford it. There are specific conditions to be met before going on the Hajj, specifically the performance of the first Four Pillars. There is a reason why the Hajj was set as the final Pillar, coming after Syahaadah (the pronouciation of faith in Allah and Muhammad as his Prophet) Solat (the prescribed daily prayers), Zakat (the annual charity contribution), fasting for 30 days during the month of Ramadhan and finally the Hajj, In a sense only “complete” Muslims, having performed the first 4 Pillars would perform the Hajj. At least this is how I look at it, not being an extremely good Muslim myself.

By the way, I followed your link to Faith Freedom International. I found it disturbing how much some people hate Islam, because that is the impression I got from reading some of the articles.

29. Mutahir - 12 January, 2007

Hello Paralleldivergence,

A very good article, I am a Muslim and from Pakistan, I truly agree on what you are saying. Not just Islam, these politicians cash in on religious beliefs and use them to achieve their motives. You are right in saying that Islam is being misinterpreted by many people and the cause is those people who say they are Muslims, yet they don’t follow the religion ISLAM properly.

Freedom of faith website must be good, I haven’t had a look yet and will do after commenting here.

Very Nice work, Keep it Up.!

Regards
Mutahir

30. paralleldivergence - 12 January, 2007

Hi Mutahir,

The real site to look at is http://www.ijtihad.org/ – this is representative of a truly progressive Islam – for the 21st century instead of the 14th. Glad you liked the article and peace be with you.

31. Phrontiste - 12 January, 2007

Hi Paralleldivergence,

I shall visit the site you mentioned soon !

Keep in touch !

Mutahir (Phrontiste)

32. Farid - 8 February, 2007

I think you are wrong about the Islamic school. I’m from Indonesia, and I know that Islamic school is transferring knowledge about science,international languange,math,etc. they don’t only teaching about how to pray or how to read Arabic (especially useful for reading Qur’an). Just investigate it. and for the people you called terrorist, or hardliner. they just doing what they believe,they just want to free all people from sins. and i think the real terrorist is The FUCKING BASTARD AMERICA!!!. Who makes people in third world such as Indonesia tortured, they rule the economic growth and economic wisdom that makes the rich people happy and stay wealthy, but they kill poor people. FUCK AMERICA

33. paralleldivergence - 8 February, 2007

It doesn’t help your cause when you respond this way Farid.

34. Farid - 9 February, 2007

sorry, but the importance is: Islamic school is not about pray and religious knowledge,but also the international knowledge such as science, math, and English. I hate America for their economic invasion to the third world such as here

35. paralleldivergence - 15 February, 2007

Hi Farid,

I was referring to “some” Islamic schools, not all. I’m not sure of the direct influence of America on Indonesia. You don’t think over-population has anything to do with the problems there?

36. Monkey - 16 February, 2007

paralleldivergence: You have a very interesting and enlightening website. Farid may not take the most diplomatic approach but don’t dismiss someone’s views so easily. I think that the USA is almost unanimously hated the world over and it’s not without reason. Hatred doesn’t help anyone, however, we need to understand this, empathize as you promoted in your blog about new years resolutions.

To all: Don’t close your mind to possibilities that are unpopular in “the western world” (politically incorrect, etc) and always try to see an issue from other perspectives. Without understanding we can’t have peace and the debate that has taken place in this comment thread is testament to that. Peace to all of you, it’s unusual to find fair and civil discussions on the tough topics such as religion, economics and politics.

For those who hate America: Tyrannical “puppet” dictators do not represent the people of America any more than they represent the people who they seek to oppress. There is a seriously evil and powerful system of control established INTERNATIONALLY. World economic policies are being set to cater to the rich and to the international corporations that exert political power and economic control over us all.

Those who seek to control the people are the enemy of the people. Those who control the economies exert control on people.

The old saying “Money is the root of all evil” is not very far from the truth.

37. paralleldivergence - 16 February, 2007

Hi Monkey. Great post. You are of course correct. I wasn’t dismissing Farid in any way. I asked him a question in return, because I’d like him to elaborate what he’s trying to say. His first comment was more of a rant and his second started to clarify his stand. I’d like to see the discussion continue as it has with others on this post. I know the U.S. has some rotten international policies, and that they are not alone in how they behave toward other countries, particularly those that are poorer. But corruption is also very widespread at the top levels of most poor countries – all at the expense of the population. In some cases very large populations such as Indonesia.

It’s not only money, it’s also power. Another saying is “absolute power corrupts absolutely”.

Glad you like the site Monkey.

38. fourtynine - 9 March, 2007

Hi, first of all, do not consider me as a terrorist, not all Moslem is terrorist. Second, why do I hate economic invasion is because the economic invasion makes people here in Indonesia live in poor condition. For example, Freeport, the US mining company that explores the gold in Papua, every people who works for Freeport is rich, but Freeport does not give any benefits to Papua people. People there are still living in poor economic condition, and they do not have chance to be Freeport employee. Freeport is also poisoning land and water by its mining trash, which makes Papua nature, has become poisonous and hazardous. Third, I do not hate America as a country, and I do not hate American people, but I hate America as its ability to control the cost of fuel, when dollar rate of exchange raising, the cost of fuel is also raising. By the fuel raising cost, food, water, and any needs, cost is also raising. That makes people here live in poor condition. By the way, I must admit that Indonesia is still having problem with corruption and the large amount of people here. Fourth, you may see a modern Islamic school in Indonesia such as Al Azhar or Gontor, those school are teaching not only about how to pray or how to reading Arabic text, but also English, math, science, history and other lessons. Fifth, I do not always agree with the hardliner or terrorist, I hate them if they kill people who do not make any sin or guilty, but I agree with them if they kill guilty and sinned people. I believe that Moslem love peaceful life, because every Moslem is taught to be peacekeeper, not to be killer. Ok, thanks for such interesting discussion. No hard feeling right?

39. paralleldivergence - 9 March, 2007

Hi fourtynine! Welcome to the site and thanks for your comments. Firstly, I envy you for your ability to grasp more than one language. Your English is very good. I have no hard feelings against anyone. People are people after all.

Global companies certainly do take advantage of poorer countries and in a lot of cases, corrupt governments in those countries turn a blind eye because they get their slice of the pie – at the expense of their own population. I was referring more to religious madrassas in countries like Pakistan where fanaticism is forced into young minds.

As for killing “guilty” and “sinned” people, who judges them? What’s right and what’s wrong? Different peoples have different opinions on this. Perhaps we should leave them to be judged by God instead of by Man. People kill “in the name of God”, but can it be truly justified? You can punish without murdering.

40. fourtynine - 9 March, 2007

Hi again. I’m Farid, I understand that I got too much anger when the first time I visit your blog, so that I want to apologize for my comment, then I tried to give the realistic and objective comment. Thank you. I’ll continue to discussing about guilty and sinned, if you still wish. Thank you

41. paralleldivergence - 10 March, 2007

Sure Farid, I’m interested in knowing what you judge as “guilty” and “sinned”.

42. fourtynine - 16 March, 2007

Okay. Let us narrowing the topic first. We are going to discuss about what are the definitions of guilty and sinned people, and I want to clarify first, that you are agree with statement “Islamic schools are not only teaching about Arabic, how to pray and read Qur’an, but also teaching about math, science, English, and any other lessons, just like any other public schools”. I just refer your comment that “you were only referring some of Islamic schools, not all”. Especially, you are only referring to Pakistani Islamic schools. Then for the economic invasion, can we close this discussion with the inference that America’s policies have something to do with the economic growth and economic wisdom in third world, such as here in Indonesia? However, Indonesia are still having problem with over population and corrupt government, instead of the economic invasion that makes people live in poor economic condition. Now, we start to describe who guilty and sinned people are. From what I have learned in Islam, guilty people must be sinned people. Them, who pray and worship for anything but Allah, leave the obligation to pray five times a day, do not fasting when Ramadhan comes, do not fulfill their obligation to contribute annual charity (we called it “Zakat Fitrah”), and last, wealthy and healthy but do not go to Mecca to pilgrimage. People who leave five Pillars are guilty and sinned people, the dispensation may be given, but it requires other cases such as old people may leave fasting, because his body is unable to withstand a day without eat and drink. Let us continue for the other descriptions of guilty and sinned people. People, who have sex with other people beside his wife /her husband, drink alcohol, gamble, and corrupt or steal are sinned. There is so many description of who are guilty and sinned people, people who kill people are sinned people too. However, you may look again may comment, “I do not always agree with the hardliner or terrorist, I hate them if they kill people who do not make any sin or guilty, but I agree with them if they kill guilty and sinned people. I believe that Moslem love peaceful life, because every Moslem is taught to be peacekeeper, not to be killer”. It is forbidden for us to kill, but death sentence is allowed to revenge. For example, if I murder someone deliberately, the family victim may avenge it by killing me. Rapist may also be punished death. In addition, consider that we love peace, we will not kill for revenge, we still respect human’s right, and we are not always punishing murderer or rapist with death sentence. Once again, I will not dispute with every people in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, or everywhere in this world, if they kill colonizer*, rapist, drunken men, or thief, but I hate every people who kill without any reasons. In my opinion, Hardliner, extremist or terrorist kill people that they are considered as colonizer or sinned people as I describe above, and I would not dispute with it. This is not about finding out who are guilty and sinned, but describing why people that called extremist or hardliner murder, it because they have reasons.
*(colonizer is considered as sinned people too, and we are allowed to kill them. Because wherever we live, whatever our nationality, we must love our nation, and expel colonizer is a part of loving nation)

43. paralleldivergence - 16 March, 2007

Hi Farid (fourtynine),

I agree with you that regular “Islamic Schools” teach more than just the Qur’an. We have them here and their students sit our standard examinations. They are like any religious school – for example like a Catholic school, except there is a focus on Islam. Nothing wrong with that. There is something wrong with the extremist Islamic schools that do exist.

Thank you for your definition of “guilty” and “sinned”. Can I ask you a question? You said, “People who leave (do not live by the) five Pillars (of Islam) are guilty and sinned people”. You also said, “I agree with them if they kill guilty and sinned people”.

So what you appear to believe is that any person on this planet who does not classify themselves as a Muslim and does not pray five times a day, fast during Ramadhan, etc, etc, is Guilty and Sinned. What you are saying is that of the 6.6 BILLION people on this planet, only 1.3 billion of them (those who say they are Muslims) are NOT “guilty and sinned”. You are saying that every person who follows another religion (not Islam) or follows no religion, is Guilty and Sinned.

Then you said that those that drink alcohol, gamble, steal or are corrupt or adulterers are also guilty and sinned. I am certain that a proportion of the 1.3 billion Muslims would have done at least one of these “bad” deeds. Let’s say it’s 300 million across the globe. Turkey’s a pretty corrupt (by your standards) Muslim country isn’t it? You have “Muslim” prisoners in your jails, don’t you?

So, now we have only 1 billion people or 15% of the world’s population that are NOT guilty and sinned.

Finally, by your logic, you have no problem if 5.6 BILLION of the world’s population is KILLED because they are guilty and sinned.

Muslims want the West to tolerate and understand Muslims and Islam. You say you are not a hardliner or an extremist, but what you have said is you wouldn’t mind if 85% of the Earth’s population was wiped out. That’s not very tolerant. Is this the way all “moderate” Muslims think?

We’re back to the title of this whole discussion – “The Hajj is Peaceful, but is Islam?”

44. fourtynine - 20 March, 2007

Hi, thanks for responding my comments. I want to clarify once again that “I believe that MUSLIMS LOVE PEACEFUL LIFE, because every Muslims are taught to be peacekeeper, not to be killer”, that is the principal thought. Then we go to murder. The first murder I would accept in this world is death sentence, when someone killed others and then he was punished death, I’d agree with it, with the consideration that I would not protest if the death sentence did not happen. Death sentence is maximum sentence, while minimum sentence will not bother me. Any punishment is the judge decisions. The second murder I would accept is the murder in war, battle or when expelling colonizer. So, I think murder (I would exceptionally accept) will only be happened if the condition above occurs. Henceforth, I consider we all love peace and neither one of every body wants to start war, and then no murder will last; besides murder is forbidden for Muslim. I know that every body makes mistake, everybody is guilty and sinned, but every body will be asking and giving forgiveness. There is no need to me to kill the people that are classified as guilty and sinned above. Then, why do hardliner kill THEM (guilty and sinned)? No they are not killing THEM; they kill the people that are considered as infidel and colonizer, Iraqi kill Americans army, because they consider them (Americans army) as infidel and colonizer. Unfortunately, their bombs kill others Muslims (and in this case, I do not agree with them), or, probably there are “some” people that are bombing Muslims where they act as they are Muslims, but the aim is creating riots and make the world consider Muslims as terrorist. What about killing 5.6 BILLION of the world’s population? Ha ha, I think it would not happen. Remember, we love peace, we are not killer, and every Muslims are brothers; brothers will not kill his brothers just because he is not praying five times a day, breaking his fast, do not pay annual charity, and not going to Mecca. Brothers will not kill his brothers that gamble, drink alcohol, busted for criminals’ behaviors, violations against law and going to jail and etc, but brothers will remind brothers, brothers will always help their brothers to be better. Finally, what about person who follows another religion (not Islam) or follows no religion? We will not bother anyone, remember WE LOVE PEACE. It does not matter you follow another religion or you follow no religion, we will not kill you, and we respect human rights. There were situations that we were allowed to kill people, but on those situations, we would choose to avoid killing people as long as we could. Can you get what I mean? Sorry, my English is bad (maybe my explanation does not clear and understandable). By the way, no hard feeling right? This is interesting discussion.

45. paralleldivergence - 20 March, 2007

Thank you for clarifying your point of view Farid. You are right, it is a very interesting discussion and it’s the type of discussion that leaders should be having instead of wars. It is possible to set aside emotional outbursts and have civil discussions and to find common ground. And there is nothing wrong with your English. It’s MUCH better than my Indonesian. :)

You mentioned the Death Penalty. I wonder what you think of this article I wrote recently:

http://paralleldivergence.com/2007/01/05/how-saddam-killed-the-death-penalty/

46. Fourtynine - 27 March, 2007

I have already read it. Nice post. As I say before: The first murder I would accept in this world is death sentence, when someone killed others and then he was punished death, I’d agree with it, with the consideration that I would not protest if the death sentence did not happen. Death sentence is maximum sentence, while minimum sentence will not bother me. Any punishment is the judge decisions. I sometimes agree with Death sentence, but having ho problem if it is not sentenced death. And I have no problem if death sentence is erased. Thank you. Last question. can I add you to My blogroll?

47. paralleldivergence - 27 March, 2007

Absolutely! I’m happy to add you to mine, but I don’t know how many can read Indonesian. :)

48. Fourtynine - 29 March, 2007

It is Okay man. At least, people here in Indonesia will read yours! So far, I Just have one post that I wrote in English in my blog. Thanks a lot!

49. Avatar, Komentar dan Gentleman Berambut Panjang « Generasi Biru - 31 March, 2007

[…] atau Amd saya. Saya tidak berkeberatan, saya samasekali tidak takut! Tapi tolong baca ini dan ini dulu. Sudah? Kalau sudah baca tapi masih menganggap menumpahkan darah sesama Muslim manusia itu […]

50. Syariat Itu Tidak Segampang Yang Elu Kira « Parking Area - 16 June, 2007

[…] B: Maksud antum? Si A: Iya kamu tau syahadat kan? Tau sholat lima waktu kan? Tau puasa, zakat, dan Haji kan? Apa ada beda antara syahadatnya orang Arab dengan orang India sampai orang Belanda dan orang […]

51. Agama, Islam, dan Kesamaannya Dengan Komunisme « Parking Area - 23 July, 2007

[…] semua calon haji melakukan kegiatan yang sama, berpakaian sama, menjalani rute yang sama. Kalau saat naik Haji seluruh umat Islam di dunia bisa damai, kenafa saat udah pulang Haji dan diluar Haji … Sehingga menjadi umat yang tertinggal. Padahal sudah dilatih dan ditunjukkan persamaan dan cara […]

52. Neo Forty-Nine - 7 August, 2007

Hmmmm…. Islam love peace, the bomber are just people who love to destroy and make a negative perception about Islam… Peace!

53. zahra - 14 October, 2007

if you don”t know about islam then don’t say anything negative about!!
not that i am saying this to any of you…thats all i got to say to some people

54. paralleldivergence - 14 October, 2007

I don’t know if you’ve seen this documentary Zahra, but please watch it. http://tinyurl.com/2bvqzp – Islam is a peaceful religion, but many of its adherents are not peaceful.

55. moonir - 2 November, 2007

salm how r u brothers in islam

56. moonir - 2 November, 2007

shut the hall up noe forty -nine i willl come and kll in hall u blady ching chong

57. jeopardygame - 2 November, 2007

If I interpret your two comments above correctly moonir, you believe that to be a “brother in islam” you cannot question or criticize islamic terrorism. If Neo Forty-Nine has a belief in Islam, but not in fantical men blowing things and people up in the name of Islam, then she is probably the truer Muslim of the two of you.

Your second comment helps to reinforce the opinion that the West has about Muslims – intolerant, violent and racist. Is that how you want Islam to be seen? Or is that just you?

58. Al-Taqqya - 11 November, 2007

Is Islam Peaceful?

Samina Malik, 23yr old airport worker from the UK, was tried and found guilty at the Old Bailey of, ‘Possessing documents likely to be used in Terrorism’, under the UK’s Terrorism Act 2000.

She cried when the verdict was delivered and will be sentenced later.

What documents, I hear you say, could necessitate sentencing a yound woman to prison? Read on and see just how peaceful Islam really is.

Samina Malik is a poet; and here is one she wrote earlier:

HOW TO BEHEAD

It’s not as messy or as hard as you may think,
It’s all about the flow of the wrist.
Sharpen the knife to its maximum.
And before you begin to cut the flesh.
Tilt the fool’s head to its left.
Saw the knife back and forth.
No doubt that the punk will twitch and scream.
But ignore the donkey’s ass.
And continue to slice back and forth.
You’ll feel the knife hit the wind and food pipe.
But don’t stop.
Continue with all your might.
About now you should feel the knife vibrate.
You can feel the warm heat being given off,
But this is due to the friction being caused……….

What a delightful and enlightened example of Muslim womanhood she is.

I used to think that when the Mullahs proclaimed that women were mentally deficient that they were overstating the case for male superiority.

Now I realise that at least as far as Muslim women are concerned they are correct.

Islam will be spread by the (S)WORD(S).

Al-Taqqya

59. paralleldivergence - 11 November, 2007

Al-Taqqya, I’m not sure it’s fair to describe all Muslim women as potential Samina Maliks, but this story does highlight an important situation that maybe others will start to understand. When Samina was born, she was born godless. To a baby, there is no comprehension of God, of Heaven nor of all the rituals that supposedly make up a religious life. All of those things will be drummed into them as they grow up. “If you don’t follow Islam, you will grow up a Kaffir and when you die you will burn in the fires of Hell for eternity”. It’s a fear campaign of the worst kind. Then it gets mixed with messages of hate against Kaffirs which ultimately leads to violence.

I don’t know how long Samina Malik has been writing this kind of poetry and having these thoughts, but I can guarantee you that she did not think them up on her own. Militant Muslim men have caused this in her in only 23 short years. It is an absolute tragedy for humanity that we have young male and female suicide bombers so brainwashed that they believe they will end up in Heaven and their family will be protected and cared for if they murder Kaffirs.

The main thing driving the growth of Islam in the world is not people converting as many would like us to believe. It’s the Muslim birthrate which is many times greater than in the West and it’s the ruthless indoctrination that starts at birth and produces very sad people like Samina Malik.

60. Al-Taqqya - 11 November, 2007

Parallel Divergence.

I see we have much to discuss, but before I comment further on your post above I would like to consider how best to progress.

However, I would like to compliment you on your site and the balanced way you approach these ‘conversations’. in spite of some quite provocative entries.

I particularly liked your quiz.

Islam will be spread by (S)word(s)

61. paralleldivergence - 11 November, 2007

Thanks Al-Taqqya. I think people forego discussion in favour of war -might and power speak when the brain can’t – or won’t. I have to power to reject and delete every comment that is added to this article that I don’t like, but I choose not to. Everyone has a right to their own opinion and it’s only through discussion that we can all see alternative points of view and weigh up the arguments in order to formulate or revise our own thinking.

This is an important, but very contentious topic. We all saw what happened when a Danish newspaper published some cartoons that weren’t even all that funny. That’s what happens when people don’t talk.

If people have taken their time to read through the article at the top and through the now 60+ comments added they would have witnessed multiple sides to this issue and I’m certain read things they didn’t know before. That’s the point of this entire website. Every article is meant to be a talking point and most of them are.

62. Al-Taqqya - 12 November, 2007

Is Islam peaceful?

Having given this matter a lot of thought I would have to say, ‘No’. And that is because the covenant is conditional.

There are those who would disagree, and that is their right.They would say that if the Caliphate came into existence the world would be at Peace. That is of course non-sense. Of the 73 different sects in Islam only one is ‘going to paradise’. The remainder are going to ‘burn in the fires of Hell’. The problem is nobody knows which sect is the lucky one!

Both Islam ‘is’, and Mohammed ‘was’ peaceful in the same way that Genghis Khan was peaceful.

Genghis Khan, who lived some 500 hundred years after Mohammed, the man who united the waring tribes across Mongolia and built an Empire that eventually stretched from the Pacific Ocean to the borders of the Middle East and Europe, was a peacuful man just so long as no-one stood up to him.

Genghis Khan, when he approached a city would issue an ultimatum to the leaders. Surrender and become part of my Empire or suffer the consequences. Those who capitulated were welcomed into his growing Empire. Those who resisted were put to the sword; and many were. Eventually most people capitulated. I wonder why?

Mohammed was the same, with the spread of what we call Islam i.e submission.. submission to the will of Allah. Sorry, Allah The Most Merciful.

The birth of Islam was, in many cases, brutal, and remains so to the present day. The development of that philosophy is for another post.

63. paralleldivergence - 13 November, 2007

OK Al-Taqqya, you’ve made your point about (S)WORD(S). :)

From a historical perspective, yes, the spread of Islam was pretty violent, but so was the spread of Christianity. Take a look at this:

http://www.mapsofwar.com/ind/history-of-religion.html

I’d prefer to discuss what’s happening today though.

64. Al-Taqqya - 14 November, 2007

Please do not be so impatient.

It is only by understanding the history and the philosophy of Islam that you can hope to grasp why people react the way they do today.

Your video shot undercover in Britain http://tinyurl.com/2bvqzp highlights the mindset of the modern day Islamic fundamentalism. Especially when you add the sectarian twist.

Totally at variance with what Muslims would have you believe about Islam, it is however a rapidly growing force. As you so rightly pointed out Muslims breed faster than Christians; which is one reason that so many ‘captive Muslims’ ie children appear.

And this is why you see so many of those pitiful pictures of infants born to Muslim parents being held aloft wearing Hamas costumes carrying tiny grenades or rifles. To the Muslims they are the warriors of the future, destined to fight meaningless wars. To the West it is child abuse or, if you are on the religious right in America, a reason to send your children to a ‘God Camp’.

To get good men to carry out evil deeds your must first indoctrinate them with religion!

65. paralleldivergence - 14 November, 2007

I’m not impatient Al-Taqqya. :) Just don’t want to dwell on what is often corrupted history. Too many different versions of the same thing once you go more than a couple of hundred years into the past.

As for now, I agree with you there are many bad people doing many bad things (especially to our children) all in the name of religion.

66. Al-Taqqya - 14 November, 2007

Let us go back to the 6th Century CE.

The political map as we know it didn’t exist. Communication was almost non-existent. Most people lived in their villages or were nomadic herdsman. Larger centers of populations were few and far between. There was no understnading of how the world works. Very little what we would call, or recognise, as science.

The Greek empire has faded as had the ‘might of the Roman Empire’. Christianity was gaining a foothold but that spread principally through Europe. Judaism was probably the most important widespread religion in the middle east, as there are records of ‘The People of the Book’ all over what we now know as Arabia, Persia, Etc.

However the majority still had their pantheon of gods. And it is in this contect that Mohammed started to build his empire.

Now we know from archeological studies that ‘New’ ideas were often superimposed over old ones. Colonizers or conquerors would adopt a pre-existing religious site for the new ideas and retain the original focus for the ‘New Religion’. Similarly they would incorporate ‘old’ ceremonies or rituals into the new; this would make transition from old to new easier. Because they newsomers never knew if the old gods were more powerful than theirs, so best to use both sets.

Islam is no different. Ancient sites were ‘re-used’ including the Ka’ba.

http://archnet.org/library/sites/one-site.jsp?site_id=8801

There is where the problems arose with Salman Rushdie’s book ‘The Satanic Verses’. Trying to bury the past, ‘modern’, if I can use that term in relation to Islam, clerics attempted to stop the book. All that did was to cause a lot of unnecessary uproar and make Salman Rushdie very rich. Rushdie was a Muslim writing about something buried deep in the history of Islam that the narrow minded individuals at the top wanted to stay buried. They even called it a lie when it evidently was not. Had they ignored it, nothing would have happened and the riots would not have occurred.

Mohammed did not have a early powerbase to enforce his ideas so had to tread more carefully and there is, in my humble opinion, no doubt that he incorporated per-Islamic ideas into his new religion to make it maore palatable to the early believers. Once, however, he had his powerbase that was different. Islam was spread by both the word and by the Sword.

So what we have is a new superstition (religion) predominantly observed by the peoples of the desert, absorbing elements of ‘more primitive’ tribal beliefs, which linked itself back to the ‘old testament’ of the Jews and directly to Abraham. (There were about 300 ‘gods’ worshipped at the Ka’ba including Allah who was ‘The Moon God’) Incidentally Mohammed’s father, who died before his birth was named Abd-allah.

Islam was based on the Arabian tribal system. the head of the village/tribe was an absolute ruler in his arena. There was no dissent, free will, or any other choice and of course because his wishes held sway no choice of religion. If you wanted to live that is.

The ‘visions’ and philosphy of Muhammed held sway, although he was illiterate. His views were written down by scribes and AFTER HIS DEATH were published. There is no chronological sequence and no verifiction of that what was written are the words that were in fact spoken. And, like all religious book full of contradiction.

Interestingly enough in pre-Islamic society, outside Judaism there were no ‘prophets’ or ‘apostles’, Mohammed introduced both. Why?
So that he could speak for God?

In his visions which are now believed could be as a result of epilepsy.
http://www.jihadchat.com/lofiversion/index.php?t4720.html or if you prefer it http://www.neuropsychcenter.net/11.html he was taken to heaven on a winged horse. I wonder did he borrow the idea from the ancient Greeks.

Fourteen centuries later we have a religion with a world-wide following, with a mindset of a desert leader. Primitive attitudes but with access to modern technology.

Mohammed’s philosophy was, and Islam’s still is if you listen to the ‘correct people’, that women are deficient and therefore ALWAYS inferior to men. They are chattels and there husbands have the right to physically chastise them if they are not subservient.

Mohammed had, some say, upto 16 wifes? But the poor ordinary Muslim male can only have four. One of his wives he married when she was a mere child, 6 years of age, and had sex with her when she was 9. I find this sexual violence totally sickening.

So, my point for this brief discourse is that, we have in the 21century CE a global religion based on the revelations of a man, who was illiterate, never knew his father and became an orphan at the age of 6, who quite possibly had those revelations whilst under the effect of an epileptic seizure.

His revelations were rejected by the predominant religious groups of the day i.e. Jews and Christians, and after that turned from kindly descriptions of them as ‘People of the Book’ to describing them as ‘Apes’, and warning that they should not be befriended.

Yes, he spread the word as the word but would gladly use the sword; as he and his successors did as they spread the Islam across North Africa and into Europe.

We have a religion that claims the right to ‘absorb’ everything into its clutches but denies the right to leave, under pain of death.

Claims humility, but displays the arrogance to say what ever it likes about everyone else.

States that any Muslim who instead of seeking guidance about problems has the temerity to question Islam or the teachings of the Prophet is an ‘atheist’. And can be punished for his temerity.

Demands that its views are acceeded to or suffer the consequences.

Claim that suicide bombers (for that is what they are I refuse to accept them as Maryrs) that go out and kill and main the innocent (In the name of Allah the most merciful of course) are not followers of the religion that I follow. Well, I am truly sorry for you because they have Islamic names and they worship your God in your House of God, and they kill in his name!!

Mohammed prophesied that there would be 73 sects of Islam, there are in fact over 150 but the problem we all have to face are the Wahhabis. The strictest of all the sects, in fact their battle cry still is.
“Kill and strangle all infidels which give companions to Allah.”
Of course not all Wahhabis are terrorists but all terrorists are Wahhabis. That is fact.

Is Islam violent? You can answer that question for yoursleves.

67. Al-Taqqya - 15 November, 2007

If you have any doubts whatsoever that it is religion, and in particular Islam, that is the root cause of violence, especially against women then read this from the BBC website.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7095209.stm

68. paralleldivergence - 15 November, 2007

Hi Al-Taqqya, not sure if you’ve seen Pat Condell’s latest rant. Pat has a lot of things to say about all things religious, but this time he’s turned his sights on Islamofascists. He spits out his scorn pretty easily despite the West’s fascination with political correctness.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ead_1195057244

69. Al-Taqqya - 15 November, 2007

I am not aware of this Pat Condell before, but now that I have seen it I must say that his views are somewhat interesting. I have to admit that he is correct in what he says, and I say that knowing that the only thing that Islam respects is strength. This is the tribal attitude towards behaviour.

That is why Saddam Hussein was respected. He was a monster who murdered countless thousands of Muslims and Kurds and he was hated for in Iraq, but he was respected by other leaders in the Arab world for his ‘strength’.

The fact that he was a psychopathic murderer is not relevant. He was that one who bought the ‘super gun’ from the British trying to hide the gunbarrel as a pipeline. His intention? To fire shells into Isreal. The other Arabs respect what he did. Had he succeeded the other Arab and Muslim leaders would have been 100% behind him. Except for Kuwait perhaps.

This Muslim Council for Great Britain speak for no-one but self-interest. They are just promoting the spread of Islam. That is their duty as they see it ~ The Caliphate.

They see democracy as weakness, without strength or purpose. This is unlike Islam of course, and, if you die in pursuit of Allah’s desire then you will go to paradise.

There is no rationality, no critical thinking with the majority of Muslims only blind faith.

My earlier comments about Islam’s beliefs belonging in the 7th Century CE are highlighted by the following:

http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/07/11/05/10165273.html

This article makes me glad that I am now on the outside looking in. And not in the inside looking out.

70. paralleldivergence - 16 November, 2007

That article’s not as much a concern as this one, Al-Taqqya:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=071115145104.rykb7bub&show_article=1

“A court in the ultra-conservative kingdom of Saudi Arabia is punishing a female victim of gang rape with 200 lashes and six months in jail, a newspaper reported on Thursday.
The 19-year-old woman — whose six armed attackers have been sentenced to jail terms — was initially ordered to undergo 90 lashes for “being in the car of an unrelated male at the time of the rape,” the Arab News reported.

But in a new verdict issued after Saudi Arabia’s Higher Judicial Council ordered a retrial, the court in the eastern town of Al-Qatif more than doubled the number of lashes to 200.”

Can any “moderate” Muslim please explain this?

71. Al-Taqqya - 20 November, 2007

My friend, are you not truly deafened by the silence?

72. Al-Taqqya - 27 November, 2007

It is now 11 days since you asked your question and no-one has answered.

A Muslim does not bend his will to Allah, gives himself body and soul. Submits his very being. This is why no-one will respond. The punishments, no matter how barbaric the rest of the world see them are, in the eyes of Islam, Just. They were written by the scribes from the sayings of the Prophet.

For a Muslim to question, or to speak against the Prophet, would be heresy. He would be classed as an atheist. And of course he would ‘Go to Hell’.

All nonsense of course but that is what Muslims are brought up to believe.

Anyone who spoke out in defence of those punished in the name of Allah would be stepping into very dangerous territory. The fact that the west protests reinforces the will of the Wahhabi clerics to show the strength of Islam. Show the rest of the world, including the other Islamic Sects how ‘true Islam’ enforces the ‘Will of Allah’.

73. Al-Taqqya - 27 November, 2007

The fact that in the 21st century CE a man is sentenced to death for, of all things,’witchcraft’ is, if it were not so serious, laughable. The fact that a young woman is sentenced to 200 lashes for being in the presence of a male who was not a relative is reprehensible.

It is acceptable for people to be punished when they break the law but Islam does not accept that a persons religious beliefs, the covenant between themselves and their God, are their own private business and nothing to do with society. They claim that for certain ‘offences’, those guilty will ‘Go To Hell’.

They state that Allah is all knowing, therefore he is always aware of what men think and do. So if you accept this, Allah can make his own mind up as to the punishment that is ‘Just’.

This, however, is not enough for the Clerics. They claim the right not only to judge people, in the name of Allah, they claim the right to send those same souls to meet Allah early. The fact that they may have mis-interpreted Allah’s will is irrelevant.

74. Al-Taqqya - 27 November, 2007

I was present in Bradford, in the North of England, when the protest march took place against Salman Rushdie’s book, ‘The Satanic Verses’, in either 1988 or 1989.

Their been some ‘disquiet’ but nothing too serious until an Iranian turned up to tell everyone how the Prophet had been ‘maligned’ and Islam ‘insulted’ and that the English who had published the booh should not be allowed to get away with it. In keeping of course with ‘Allah the Most Merciful’s’ Fatwa on Rushdie – Accompanied by several offers of rewards for Rushdie’s death.

Now this is something that all Muslims, who rant and rave about non-Muslims should consider.

Of course there were those who were born in England but many of the elders were from Pakistan. The concept of a ‘novel’ was unknown to them because, apart from a little Arabic, most of them could not read, and the Satanic verses was not at that time published in Arabic. And, if it was as bad as it was claimed, just who had read it?

So a march was arranged. Muslims who were non-English, being allowed to protest, in a Christian country, that their religion of Islam and its Prophet, were being maligned, by another Muslim.

The Police had no guns, sticks or whips. They moved freely amongst the marchers only to make sure that there were no signs about killing Rushdie.

The march took place with about 20 police alongside the march and apart form a few young hotheads passed without trouble.

Just what would have happened had a march been planned in a Muslim country by Non-Muslims who claimed they had a grudge about their religion being misrepresented.

There are those in Islam who criticize democracy as being weak. They demean all religions apart form Islam, and then go on to promote their particular Sect as being ‘The One’. And yet it a Christian country, in this case England, who has the inner strength to accept others, and of different religions into their midst, and extend to them the right to protest.

They are allowed to sit in the seat of power as democratic representatives in the English Parliament and they have even made some Muslims, Lords.

From where I stand that is not weakness.

75. Al-Taqqya - 29 November, 2007

This intellectual stupidty will only confirm in non-Muslims counties that Islam belongs in the 7th century CE and not the 21st!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7117430.stm

76. paralleldivergence - 29 November, 2007

Hi Al-Taqqya. Yes, the teddy bear story is pretty ridiculous in this day and age. And so is this one – from supposedly progressive Qatar of all places:

http://www.scopical.com.au/articles/News/1391/Middle_East__42__of_women_condone_domestic_violence

77. Al-Taqqya - 29 November, 2007

I am ashamed.

The problem lies with the Prophet Mohammed. Women in Islam are seen by men as deficient and in need of discipline because the Prophet said so. Therefore men have not only the right, but the duty, to control and discipline their wives.

In Islam, male members of families have abused women in many ways for 1400 years. Male children are brought believing what their eyes tell then, and female children grow up knowing what is going to happen. Everybody knows but nobody does anything.

This pattern will not stop until this mental conditioning is broken.

Until responsible Islamic Governments accept this pattern of behaviour as unacceptable and take the appropriiate actions to deal with it then nothing will happen.

The biggest problem as I see it is to educate the clerics that perhaps the Koran is not always correct, and that will not be easy.

78. paralleldivergence - 1 December, 2007

And now the poor teacher in Sudan who was only trying to help disadvantaged children has the muslims of Sudan calling for her execution because 15 days in a Sudanese prison is too lenient for naming a teddy bear Muhammad.

All Muslims are being openly condemned by their inaction against this stupidity – just have a read of some of the comments:

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=3873&edition=2&ttl=20071201092045

As one muslim writes – “Where is the Muslim Outrage?”

http://desicritics.org/2007/12/01/005737.php

The silence is deafening.

79. Al-Taqqya - 3 December, 2007

In the UK Muslims may not have taken to the streets to protest about the rediculous savagery of those in the Sudan but 10,000 Muslims did respond! Perhaps there is hope.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It emerged this weekend that 10,000 British Muslim families have bought teddy bears named after a Muslim prophet to raise money for Muslim refugees in Sudan.

The bears have been sold by the Islamic Society of Britain since 2004 with proceeds going to the charity Islamic Relief. The money raised has helped Muslims displaced by floods and the state-sponsored massacres in Sudan. The society said the bears � which have sold out � were “much loved by parents and children alike”. Half of each bear’s £15 price tag goes to charity.

The toys were marketed as Adam the Muslim Prayer Bear by the society’s council, which is advised by top Islamic scholars and academics.

The bears were named after Adam, who as well as being the first human in the Christian account of the creation, is also revered as a prophet in Islam.

The bears recite the Islamic greeting “assalamu alaikum” (peace be with you) when their paws are pushed, and add lines such as “In the name of Allah, the most merciful, the most kind”.

Naved Siddiqi, a spokesman for the Islamic Society of Britain, said: “Adam and Mohammed are only names. The irony is that if the Prophet had seen what Gillian’s class did, he would have probably laughed. The Sudanese government have clearly used the issue as a political football.”

Siddiqi added: “Gibbons clearly did not intend to insult Islam and anyway there is actually no law in core Islamic teachings which advocates punishing those who mock prophets or even God.”

80. paralleldivergence - 3 December, 2007

Fortunately, sanity prevailed and she’s now been pardoned by the President of Sudan – http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071203/wl_uk_afp/sudanbritainreligionpardon

The internet is making the world a much smaller place and evil, inhumanity and corruption, no matter where it occurs in the world, no matter what the religion, it’s being exposed. And a worldwide audience just doesn’t want to put up with it anymore.

81. paralleldivergence - 13 December, 2007

…another example: “Canadian Muslim father murders 16 year-old daughter for not wearing hijab.”

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/muslim-girl-who-clashed-with-family-killed/2007/12/13/1197135600351.html

If you choose to emigrate from a Muslim country to a western, democratic country, how can you expect to continue inflict the very strict rules you ran away from onto your children who are just trying to integrate into their new and very different home?

Wake up!

82. Al-Taqqya - 31 December, 2007

Beware all British Muslims you are all now at risk!

This surely now is madness

83. Al Taqqya - 18 January, 2008
84. paralleldivergence - 23 January, 2008

And the bad press continues… Just how many bad things must happen in the “name of Islam” before the so-called “moderate” Muslims speak out?

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/01/22/afghan-journalist.html

85. Al Taqqya - 25 January, 2008

The clerics state that this young man ‘humiliated Islam’. When will they realise, or do they not care, that they themselves are humiliating Islam?

86. Salafy Bikin Ulah lagi, Kali Ini Saya Tidak Boleh Diam « Mereka Bicara Salafy n Wahabi - 28 January, 2008

[…] percaya? Pelototin nich! Baca dari awal sampai akhir, biar semuanya jelas. Nama saya tetap ditulis Farid atau fourtynine! […]

87. Al Taqqya - 3 February, 2008

Allah the Most Merciful.

God is Great!

What a truly wonderful religion Islam is. Two perfectly innocent women, unfortunately born with congenital mental conditions and of course, unfortunately being born into an Islamic society are strapped with suicide belts and sent into their local bird market in Baghdad.

A society where women, especially those with problems, are not exactly seen as 1st class citizens.

At the appointed time of their death. Appointed of course by the brave warriors of Islam dial their mobile phones and detonate the bombs.

The death toll has now reached 100.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7223769.stm

These moral invertebrates are worse than the things you step on in the street.

Yet, people still thank Allah for saving their lives. When will they learn that it is the same God that murdered these two unfortunate women and the dozens of ordinary people shopping at the pet market.

The decisions to murder and maim as many people as possible were taken by men, not God.

The ‘Holy Book’ you call the ‘Quran’ was written by a man who suffered from diseases we know know as Acromegaly and probably also Temporal Lobe Epilepsy.

When will you wake up to the truth!

88. paralleldivergence - 4 February, 2008

I was truly disgusted when I heard about this Al Taqqya, but again, it’s just silence from the moderates. Why do they not denounce this heinous crime publicly? You know when these two unfortunate women were detonated that the perpetrators let out screams of “Allahu Akbar”. They say these people are not muslim, but they allow them in their mosques. I know some great muslim people where I work and I’ve asked them if they know of any of their congregation with hateful thoughts about the West. Each of them said, “Of course!”.

Why do they not drive them out of the mosque? “Because they are muslims!”

89. Al Taqqya - 5 February, 2008

Good people will do good things and Evil people people will do evil things, but for a good person to do true evil takes Religion.

90. Al Taqqya - 5 February, 2008

I was reading a book the other day and in the book was a section on the destrucion of the World Trade Towers on 9/11.

It mentioned that in the aftermath of the incident a service was held in a Cathedral in Washington and the sermon was given by Billie Graham. He went to great lengths to explain that the souls of those who died were in heaven, paradise. It doesn’t say how he knew, unless he had a private telephone line to God but that is what he said.

At the same time Bin Laden was praising the murderers who hi-jacked the planes and caused the crash; he also said that they were martyrs who were now in paradise.

Christianity is an offshoot from Judaism about 2000 years ago, and Islam, which started about 1400 years ago takes its roots beck to Abraham. This means that the 3 monotheistic religions all go back to the Jewish Patriarch, Abraham.

This is turn means that all 3 pray to the same God. It follows that whatever heaven or paradise is, it has to be the same for all the 3 religions. Therefore the suicide bombers, or muderers, who caused this terrible event would enter heaven and be standing next to the passengers and crew of the planes that they hi-jacked, and those who died that day in the Pentagon and the twin towers of the World Trade Centre.

I wonder what they talked about!

91. Al Taqqya - 7 February, 2008

I mention earlier in post 77 regarding a husband’s duty in Islam to control his wife and to beat her if necessary.

This is what happens when it gets out of hand. A girl, married to a violent man who believed he had the right to beat her to death. And relatives, female relatives who stood by and did nothing while this was going on.

In the Court they blamed the girl’s injuries on witchcraft, curses and other evil.

The only evil was theirs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/7230617.stm

92. paralleldivergence - 24 February, 2008

Al Taqqya, here is an amazing post that catalogues all of the many things that lately have been offensive to Islam. It’s a long list for what they call a “tolerant” religion:

http://amboytimes.typepad.com/the_amboy_times/2007/02/the_list_of_thi.html

93. Al-Taqqya - 29 February, 2008

I am surprised that the list is so small.

94. friendlypig - 2 April, 2008

This is the film that all the fuss has been about.

95. Al-Taqqya - 3 April, 2008

I have seen this film and I must stress that it is only a monority of Muslim who will carry out this actions, although many will cheer when they see it on the television. But as these claim, and can show, they are following the words of the Prophet, no other Muslims will stand and speak against them although they know in their heart that what they do is wrong.

Governments seem to be afraid to stand up to these terrorists, and so does the UN and church leaders like the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury, and they do not want to cause friction by criticizing them but the more people know an understand the better it will be.

96. paralleldivergence - 21 April, 2008

Terrible story about the Taliban and how they treat “muslims” who dare to educate young girls in school (from 2006):

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/disembowelled-then-torn-apart-the-price-of-daring-to-teach-girls-426241.html

97. Al-Taqqya - 22 April, 2008

But my Friend, this is the Religion of Peace.

This is all done in the name of their imaginary friend, Allah.

98. jeopardygame - 23 April, 2008

There’s a good discussion happening over at “World Have Your Say”:

http://worldhaveyoursay.wordpress.com/2008/04/21/do-muslims-treat-women-badly/

99. Al-Taqqya - 6 May, 2008

My Friend

Have you read the excellent article by the American Sam Harris.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/losing-our-spines-to-save_b_100132.html

100. paralleldivergence - 6 May, 2008

It is incredible how words and images can invoke such reactions that we’ve seen in recent times as widespread vandalism, calls for death and even murder. If Mr Wilders or the Danish cartoonist were wrong, they will burn in hell forever, judged by God as it says in the Qu’ran. But for there to be statements in this holy book saying a Muslim can exact revenge and execute “justice” without fear of reprisal is just plainly wrong.

101. Friendlypig - 7 May, 2008

Hi PD

This You Tube video is a 5 part series produced by the BBC Horizon team that I hadn’t seen before.

It certainly gives a lot of potential answers to questions about the origins of religious belief.

I think you will find it interesting, I know I did.

As Pat Condell might say, ‘Peace’.

102. paralleldivergence - 17 May, 2008

The Islamic Reform Movement have published a website called “Muslims Against Sharia” and their goals are:

– to educate Muslims about dangers presented by Islamic religious texts and why Islam must be reformed.
– to educate non-Muslims about the differences between moderate Muslims and Islamists (a.k.a. Islamic Religious Fanatics, Radical Muslims, Muslim Fundamentalists, Islamic Extremists or Islamofascists)
– to educate both Muslims and non-Muslims alike that Moderate Muslims are also targets of Islamic Terror

They need as much publicity as they can get.

http://www.reformislam.org/

103. Al-Taqqya - 19 May, 2008

This is long overdue.

But they still display a bad attitude when they state that being a non-Muslim is a ‘fault’.

104. Al-Taqqya - 25 May, 2008

If you wish to make yourself aware what the Religion of Peace of doing day by day you will find what you need to know on this website.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks

You will see that they are making great strides to end conflict and bring peace to the world.

105. paralleldivergence - 25 May, 2008

Thanks All-Taqqya. Votaire once said:

“Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities.”

106. paralleldivergence - 27 July, 2008

“Killing for religion is justified, say third of Muslim students
A third of Muslim students in Britain believe killing someone in the name of religion is justified, a new poll claims.”

Full; story here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/2461830/Killing-for-religion-is-justified,-say-third-of-Muslim-students.html

107. paralleldivergence - 19 August, 2008

There’s an excellent video debate (in five parts) on-line from Sydney, Australia – hosted by The Sydney Morning Herald and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

The title of the debate is “Islam is incompatible with democracy” – with speakers for and against.

http://media.smh.com.au/?rid=40689

Well worth watching and listening.

108. Hajdar Ali - 21 August, 2008

I am sorry ladies and gentlemen, but:

“The Human Rights Council at the United Nations has now banned any criticism regarding Sharia Law and human rights in the Islamic World.” – http://europenews.dk/en/node/13092

From now on, there is to be no more criticizing of Islam and Sharia Law, no matter how ridiculous, offensive, misogynistic and dangerous it may seem to be.

The UN has spoken. Peace be upon them.

109. Dick Dawkins - 26 August, 2008

Aha, but Hajdar, then we have sensible nations in this world like Sweden who bring down laws to make it illegal for schools to teach religious doctrine as if it were true.

“It will soon become illegal even for private faith schools to teach religious doctrines as if they were true. In an interesting twist on the American experience, prayer will remain legal in schools – after all, it has no truth value. But everything that takes place on the curriculum’s time will have to be secular. “Pupils must be protected from every sort of fundamentalism,” said the minister for schools, Jan Björklund.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/oct/18/godshonesttruth

110. nazir - 17 May, 2010

I just want alll the non muslim, bloody freemasonary and satanic worshippers to know that islam is a religion of peace. We have a religion, which we abide. i want to ask u chistians jews and all non muslims, which code of religion do u follow? Uve changed ur own so called holy books in to what ever u want it to be like but our holy book has not and will never change a bit. 1st c ur fake religion then comment on ours.

paralleldivergence - 17 May, 2010

Hi Nazir. You are exactly right. People of other religions have no right to question your religion before questioning their own. But my question to you, is, do you question Islam? If not, why not? Have a read of some articles written by former-Muslims specifically on the reliability of the Qu’ran: http://www.faithfreedom.org/quran/quranic-articles%20

As an atheist, I feel quite happy questioning all religions. :)

111. Friendlypig - 30 May, 2010

Hello Nazir, I would be the first to accept that there are many variations in the Judeo-Christians texts but so does Islam, as you will see if you study the Yemeni Quran. Kept in Sanaa, it becomes obvious when studied some texts have been overwritten. This does tend to suggest that the present text is not the original.

112. Friendlypig - 30 May, 2010

I would like to follow up by stating categorically that Islam is certainly the most friendly religion that I have ever come across. I know that it is often seen as misogynistic in that women have to totally covered so that they do not inflame the uncontrollable lusts of men, and that if they get raped they can be stoned to death for having sex outside of marriage, a simple matter of one woman’s testimony only carrying less weight that the man’s; but this fatwa from an Egyptian cleric, Shaikh Abdul Mohsin Al Abaican, a consultant at Saudi Arabia’s royal court, stating categorically that men and women, who are not related, can be together without contravening the tenets of Islam is wonderful and I only wish that is could be taken up across the planet. I am sure that every woman on the planet would be overjoyed to be able to participate in bringing Peace in such a manner.

http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/saudi-arabia/saudi-scholar-s-fatwa-wades-into-controversy-1.630494

Are there any more such ideas within your religion?

113. Friendlypig - 24 June, 2010

It seems like the Saudi women like the idea of breastfeeding adult males. Whatever next?

http://www.qatarliving.com/node/1119871

114. Friendlypig - 4 July, 2010

Oh Dear! Now it’s Korans at 12 paces as Saudi clerics go to war over fatwas………

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=201071\story_1-7-2010_pg7_10

115. Islamic Articles - 1 April, 2011

There’s an excellent video debate (in five parts) on-line from Sydney, Australia – hosted by The Sydney Morning Herald and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

The title of the debate is “Islam is incompatible with democracy” – with speakers for and against.

116. Ian - 14 June, 2011
117. හලාල් සහතික මුදල් ත්‍රස්ත සංවිධානයන්ට ? - 19 February, 2013

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 42 other followers

%d bloggers like this: