is it now a holy war???? maybe...... scumbags.

[digitalghost10]

Yeah, they need the Pope on their side, it's not good for their PR.

[face]

this holy war shit has to stop. and you know who gave muslims the idea of holy war? the crusaders.

terrorism is forbidden in islam and punishable by death in most cases. women and children and civilians in general are not to be touched when at war. for a group to call their strategic fight for a piece of the pie a 'jihad,' and then to violate the laws of the qur'an and the sunna is unjustified, embarassing, and criminal to say the least.

religious clerics who advise muslim states on matters of islamic law do not, to my knowledge, declare 'jihad' in the way you all think of it. jihad does not mean holy war. it means to strive or struggle, and figuratively in islam there are 2 jihads: the greater jihad is striving to be the best muslim an individual can be; the lesser jihad is a struggle for justice when the islamic community (umma) has been attacked or compromised.

anyway, when these radical groups declare 'jihad' they don't carry much credibility to the majority of the population. what does happen thanks to our lovely media here, is that people get the perception that all muslims are bound by these fatwas and declarations of war. or that there is a single monolithic 'islam' that is radical, violent, and hateful in nature. the moderate islamic modernists in the world are marginalized, or worse, categorized as part of radical movements. we need to listen to the moderates and hear what they have to say. but the US gets scared once they hear talk of a state ruled by islamic law...

[thesightless]

this holy war shit has to stop. and you know who gave muslims the idea of holy war? the crusaders.


anyway, when these radical groups declare 'jihad' they don't carry much credibility to the majority of the population. what does happen thanks to our lovely media here, is that people get the perception that all muslims are bound by these fatwas and declarations of war. or that there is a single monolithic 'islam' that is radical, violent, and hateful in nature. the moderate islamic modernists in the world are marginalized, or worse, categorized as part of radical movements. we need to listen to the moderates and hear what they have to say. but the US gets scared once they hear talk of a state ruled by islamic law...

1. well, remember the crusades took place an extremely long time ago, when there existed no true form of leadership outside of the church. people were still afraid of god and his wrath. you really cant compare the two periods. the whole planet was basically warring religios factions at the time b/c people didnt really have a voice at the time.

2. exactly. they call thier attacks a jihad simply to spread the blame to thier neighbors and fellow countrymen. its like me shooting someone who isnt catholic and claiming that the bishop told me to do it......then calling on all catholics to join me in my fight, which wasn't anyone's decision but my own.

exactly.

[davetlv]

this holy war shit has to stop. and you know who gave muslims the idea of holy war? the crusaders.

terrorism is forbidden in islam and punishable by death in most cases. women and children and civilians in general are not to be touched when at war. for a group to call their strategic fight for a piece of the pie a 'jihad,' and then to violate the laws of the qur'an and the sunna is unjustified, embarassing, and criminal to say the least.

religious clerics who advise muslim states on matters of islamic law do not, to my knowledge, declare 'jihad' in the way you all think of it. jihad does not mean holy war. it means to strive or struggle, and figuratively in islam there are 2 jihads: the greater jihad is striving to be the best muslim an individual can be; the lesser jihad is a struggle for justice when the islamic community (umma) has been attacked or compromised.

anyway, when these radical groups declare 'jihad' they don't carry much credibility to the majority of the population. what does happen thanks to our lovely media here, is that people get the perception that all muslims are bound by these fatwas and declarations of war. or that there is a single monolithic 'islam' that is radical, violent, and hateful in nature. the moderate islamic modernists in the world are marginalized, or worse, categorized as part of radical movements. we need to listen to the moderates and hear what they have to say. but the US gets scared once they hear talk of a state ruled by islamic law...

You make an excellent point and thanks for clearing up the Qur'ans view on terrorists and terrorism, however, as with all religions, original text gets bastardised for what ever agenda is being pushed at the time.

In reality, whether you like it or not, the voices that calling for jihad and encouraging young men and women to commit acts of terrorism and murder are the only voices that are being heard.

The call to jihad over the past twenty years or so has been used by some clerics as a basic call to arms, usually with no regard to saving the lives of women or children. These clerics are the ones who are doing the vast majority of Islam a disservice and are soley responsible for the unfortunate way Islam has been viewed by many in the west, especially over the past 5 years.

The problem is not in how the west reacts to these call for jiahd, but how the vast majority of muslims react, especially those who follow the teaching of the Qur'an as you've laid out above. Unfortunatley their voices are not heard.

[face]

yup. pretty much, davetlv. i think western media is also responsible for the negative view we have of islam, and the lack of moderate voices. if you read edward said's "covering islam," you will see what i mean.

thesightless: my point about the crusades was that jihad was not originally described as "holy war." true, muslim leaders expanded their empire immediately after muhammad's death, but this was mainly political. even after the abbasid revolution, islam's values were manipulated to suit the rulers. it wasn't until the abbasid caliphate that the traditions of the prophet (hadith) were even written down.

it's like the king james bible. did jesus come back and recite the bible to king james himself? no, he simply changed whatever suited him at the time.

[runningman]

Face let me guess you voted for Kerry.. Why would the USA not gget scared of a "state ruled by islamic law??'' it is a reality in this world that the muslim religion spreads and tries to take over in every place they go to.. THey each have 12 kids and grow like wildfire.. there population doubles every 30 years.. all the so caled "hot spots" in the world will show you that.. Palestine/Israel, serbia/albania.. these are places where muslims and christians clash all the time.. if they start fighting that is a sign that things are getting bad.. and they will stay calm for a while but then at any given point they will flare up.

[thesightless]

hey, runningman, i realize that you unfortunetly have to accept the fact that islamic ruled regions are indeed associated with trouble for a while. but WOW>

[face]

Face let me guess you voted for Kerry.. Why would the USA not gget scared of a "state ruled by islamic law??'' it is a reality in this world that the muslim religion spreads and tries to take over in every place they go to.. THey each have 12 kids and grow like wildfire.. there population doubles every 30 years.. all the so caled "hot spots" in the world will show you that.. Palestine/Israel, serbia/albania.. these are places where muslims and christians clash all the time.. if they start fighting that is a sign that things are getting bad.. and they will stay calm for a while but then at any given point they will flare up.

first of all, what does my voting choice have to do with moderate islam? or better yet, why is it any of your business? am i even a citizen of this country or old enough to vote? i am, but again, none of your business.

second of all, i know a lot of muslims in this country who actually voted for bush because of his religious values. believe it or not, muslims, christians, and jews share the same basic moral values. i dont consider myself muslim, but i can see how one would support bush on this account.

third, you missed my whole point. US foreign policy in the middle east is hypocritical to say the least. we support free democratic elections, but only if they lead to a secular state. they think that if islamists take control of the staet, they will do away with democracy, and US diplomatic and business relations will be severed. if we support the moderates who are arguing for taking the best of western and european ideas and innovations, and fusing them with islamic traditional values, then our interests would be secured.

this obviously too complicated for you, and many books will explain it better than i can. but you probably don't care, so just continue with your bigotry.

[face]

PS. i don't think kerry would have done a better job than bush in terms of middle east policy; i don't think he would have even taken a different approach!

[thesightless]

kerry would have this country jsut pack up and leave, he said so himself. imagaine the hatred generated if we left the place in shambles without helping them attain a gov't. also, the man has zero charisma and is simply an appeaser. i mean, bush definetly comes off as a redneck, moreso early on. but he there is something about his personality that a lot of people can identify with. the democratic base did identify with kerry, they just hated bush. thier first mistake was blowing of howard dean. even as a somewhat right leaning person i liked the guy. he shot from the hip, and was liberal in all the right ways. and conservative as well in the right ways.(regarding security)

[Yao]

Always when I think of Iran I see a country still in the clutches of the fundamentalisic clergy, but struggling hard to break loose. There many more countries where young Islamists are done with the hardliners and have voiced their wish for a more democratic way of living.

When I look at it, democracy itself is very much an applicable 'value' in any religion: as long as it [religion] knows moderation.
Authoritarian and hi?rarchical thinking is imo more a result of culture than religion. Religion itself springs from culture I think. The authoritarian and hi?rarchical way of thinking has expressed itself in religion. The only thing is: people who place the book before people, won't acknowledge this, and think the other way around: the book or the clergy are the highest authority, not man.

I'm very curious to see what will happen in Iran within the next 10-15 years: I don't believe this status quo can continue to exist much longer than that, and I believe at some point the reformists will take over. They've already created a 'base' on which to build, they just need to take their time.

Why do I mention Iran? Because despite the hassle about it's nuclear program, it has the potential to become one of the first democratic Islamic states. Because the youth wants it to. The future.