Muslim "fury" at speech by Pope

[KevinTheOmnivore]

FURY!

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/09/15/pope.islam/index.html

Muslim fury at pope jihad comments
POSTED: 8:44 a.m. EDT, September 15, 2006

(CNN) -- Pope Benedict XVI came under a hail of criticism from the Islamic world Friday for comments he made earlier in the week regarding the Prophet Mohammed and the Muslim faith, in some cities provoking street protests.

A growing chorus of Muslim leaders have called on the pope to apologize for the remarks he made in a speech in Germany on Tuesday when he used the terms "jihad" and "holy war."

Pakistan's National Assembly, parliament's lower house, unanimously passed a resolution on Friday condemning the pope's comments.

Muslim protesters shouted slogans against the pontiff at a rally in Jammu, India. And in Cairo, about 100 demonstrators gathered in an anti-Vatican protest outside the capital's al-Azhar mosque.

Meanwhile a youth center run by the Greek Orthodox church in the Gaza Strip was slightly damaged by a small explosion on Friday, witnesses told Reuters.

It was unclear if the blast was connected to the pope's comments.

In his speech, Benedict quoted 14th-century Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus who said, "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

Before quoting Paleologus during his address at the University of Regensburg on Tuesday, the pontiff noted the "brusqueness," or discourteous nature of the emperor's statement.

"God," the emperor, as the pope quoted, said, "is not pleased by blood -- and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature." (Full story)

A transcript of the pope's remarks obtained by the Associated Press television network reads: "In the seventh (sura, or chapter of the Quran), the emperor comes to speak about jihad, holy war.

"The emperor certainly knew that Sura 2, 256, reads: 'No force in matters of faith'. It is one of the early suras, from a time -- as experts say -- in which Mohammed himself was still powerless and threatened.

"However, the emperor of course also knew the requirements about the holy war that were later formulated in the Quran. Without going into details like the handling of the owners of the scriptures, or non-believers, he (the emperor) turned to his interlocutors -- in a surprisingly brusque way -- with the central question after the relationship between religion and violence.

"He said, I quote, 'Show me just what Muhammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'"

A Vatican statement said Benedict was not trying offend Muslims with his remarks.

"It was certainly not the intention of the Holy Father to ... offend the sensibilities of Muslim faithful," said Federico Lombardi, the Vatican press officer.

But offense was taken as Islamic groups and governments from across the globe weighed in.

"The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) regrets the quotations cited by the pope on the Life of the Honorable Prophet Mohammed, and what he referred to as 'spreading' Islam 'by the sword,'" a statement released by the OIC on Thursday said.

"The attribution of the spread of Islam around the world to the shedding of blood and violence, which is 'incompatible with the nature of God' is a complete distortion of the facts, which shows deep ignorance of Islam and Islamic history."

Muslim Brotherhood Chairman Mohammed Mahdi Akef also expressed anger over the pope's academic speech.

"The pope's statements come to add fuel to fire and trigger anger within the Muslim world and show that the West with its politicians and clerics are hostile to Islam."

Condemnation also came from Turkey where Benedict is scheduled to visit in November.

"His words are extremely regrettable, worrying and unfortunate in terms of the Christian world and common peace of humanity," the Anatolian state news agency quoted Ali Bardakoglu, the head of Ankara's Directorate General for Religious Affairs, as saying.

"I do not see any use in somebody visiting the Islamic world who thinks in this way about the holy prophet of Islam."

In Pakistan, the National Assembly and Senate on Friday passed unanimous resolutions against Benedict's controversial remarks.

The Pakistan Foreign Office also called into question the pope's comments, calling them highly controversial, regrettable and against Islam.

In Syria, the grand mufti, the country's top Sunni Muslim religious authority, sent a letter to the pope saying he feared the pontiff's comments on Islam would worsen interfaith relations, AP reported.

In Gaza City, Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniya issued a condemnation, saying Benedict's remarks "are not true and defamed the essence of this holy religion and it defamed the history of the Islam."

"We say to the pope to re-examine these comments and to stop defaming the Islam religion that more than 1 and half billion Muslims believe in," said Haniya, who made the remarks after Friday prayers.

But the Vatican statement said Benedict's discussion on Tuesday was quite to the contrary.

"The Holy Father's desire (is) to cultivate an attitude of respect and dialogue towards other religions and cultures, including, of course, Islam."

According to Lombardi, Benedict's speech was "a warning, addressed to Western culture, to avoid 'the contempt for God and the cynicism that considers mockery of the sacred to be an exercise of freedom.'"

CNN's Syed Mohsin Naqvi contributed to this report

Copyright 2006 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

btw, I think this is the pope on fire.

http://www.ndtv.com/images/topstories/muslimprotest2.jpg

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

dear pope,

you're fuckin' dead pal

sincerely,
mujahideen

p.s. taste and suffer my wrath bitch >:

Seriously, I don't really give a shit what the Pope thinks, I just find it irresponsible on his part. I think he's supposed to promote tolerance, that's what made Muslims respect and admire the previous Pope. He has no business bashing other religions, what exactly does he gain from it? Other than body guards.

[ScruU2wice]

Look Kevin we can't go into the Ramadan with out being mad at something. :rolleyes

[KevinTheOmnivore]

I actually think he should just apologize. Not because he did anything wrong, because he was quoting what someone fucking said, in a speech that otherwise had a different context. If "some" muslims want to act like petulant children over it, fine. But the Pope needs to be smarter than this, b/c he won't be the one to pay for it chillin' in Italy. It'll be the Christians living in the Middle East who have their churches bombed and their neighborhoods terrorized, so he needs to be a little smarter than this.

[ScruU2wice]

Somehow, somewhere, someone is going to blame the Jews for this..

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

He already apologized, expert. He said he did it in order to increase dialogue or some shit. Just an excuse, an apology never works.
It'll be the Christians living in the Middle East who have their churches bombed and their neighborhoods terrorized
lolz.

Yeah, that's totally what's gonna happen!

I think you're mistaking what's in the news with reality. There's a difference.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Muslims have already used Christians in Palestine as human shields, you think they care about burning a church?

I mean, even if this % of muslims you always talk about is so tiny and meaningless, they're still active and able enough to burn a church, are they not? I mean, hey, it's not like they don't do it to each other all of the time, eh?

"Thousands protest in Gaza over Pope's remarks on Mohammed" (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/763199.html)

Do these people have jobs? lol, am I right? Maybe if the Zionists stopped putting up check points these good folks wouldn't have so much time to protest.....

"Earlier on Friday, a youth centre run by the Greek Orthodox church in the Gaza Strip was slightly damaged by a small explosion which broke doors and shattered glass." (http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L15479661.htm)

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

Muslims have already used Christians in Palestine as human shields, you think they care about burning a church?
Let's not be selective about this Kevin. Palestinians were used as human shields too, you don't see me saying "Jews don't care!"

The problem with Palestine is politics, not religion. I fail to see why people find the need to make it "Jews vs. Islam." I just fail to see the logic behind that.

I mean, even if this % of muslims you always talk about is so tiny and meaningless, they're still active and able enough to burn a church, are they not?
If these people are given attention like I said, you are basically giving them the power to do what they want.

I fucking hate these kinds of Muslims, and they do incite a lot of violence, but their population IS tiny. There's like, slightly over 1 billion Muslims in the world, if a high percentage of them were like this, do you have any idea what the state of this world would be like?

Hell, you and I wouldn't even be sitting here, we'd be burning at a stake somewhere.
Do these people have jobs?
There's a documentary about that. You may say that as a joke but this is the reality of the situation. People who aren't schooled, people who suffer from poverty issues, people who are just, well, ignorant of everything including Islam, actually enjoy this. It defines them, gives them a sense of belonging, makes them feel like they're actually doing something with their lives when really, they don't even know the significance of what they're protesting against. They're idiots, and most of them are really sad individuals who have no other mission in life than to destroy.

Notice how they tend to come from corrupt societies. I mean do you see American Muslims, British Muslims, Danish Muslims, French Muslims, etc, resort to these things? No. Muslims in these countries do, again a really small percentage (probably just hundreds as opposed to the millions of Muslims who live in Europe, and that's a pretty damned small percentage), but Muslim converts are very rarely seen in these events and are in fact one of the biggest critics of these things. As are a lot of Arab "moderates."

I just wish the media would stop focusing on them, it feeds their little evil plans and gives them a sense of importance. Fuck that, they're idiots who need to be treated as such, they deserve no representation in the media.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Muslims have already used Christians in Palestine as human shields, you think they care about burning a church?
Let's not be selective about this Kevin. Palestinians were used as human shields too, you don't see me saying "Jews don't care!"

Really? When? Could you provide some example?


Notice how they tend to come from corrupt societies. I mean do you see American Muslims, British Muslims, Danish Muslims, French Muslims, etc, resort to these things?

You're kidding, right?

The guy who killed Theo Van Gogh had Dutch citizenship (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Bouyeri).

The 24 arrested plotters in England were British born (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/08/11/international/i092207D42.DTL), one of them a recent convert who had attended college (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2308058,00.html)/

French muslims rioted and started fires for over a week (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4407688.stm).

Should I go on?

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

Here's what an Israeli Centre for Human Rights state:
The Israeli army has been accused of using Palestinian civilians as human shields in an operation in northern Gaza.

According to the Israeli human rights group, B'tselem, six civilians including two minors were subjected to the illegal tactic during an incursion into the town of Beit Hanoun last week.
For more information -

http://www.btselem.org/english/Human_Shields/20060720_Human_Shields_in_Beit_Hanun.asp

The guy who killed Theo Van Gogh had Dutch citizenship.
This is amazing. So, when it comes to this stuff, one guy represents every Muslim in the world. But when it comes to things like Iraq and marines killing civilians "in cold blood," it's just a bunch of marines who don't represent America's overall service in Iraq.

You apply a theory in one model but not the other, and then claim to be accurate in your assumptions.

Brilliant.
The 24 arrested plotters in England were British born,
That's 24 out of over 2 million British Muslims. In which planet does this equal the majority?

Why don't I ever hear anything about the Nigerian Christians who have gone on an anti-Muslim killing spree?
Christian mobs rampaged through a southern Nigerian city Tuesday, burning mosques and killing several people in an outbreak of anti-Muslim violence that followed deadly protests against caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad over the weekend.
People are fucked up and they kill each other. Boohoo. It's human nature.

[Geggy]

The guy who killed Theo Van Gogh had Dutch citizenship (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Bouyeri).

The 24 arrested plotters in England were British born (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/08/11/international/i092207D42.DTL), one of them a recent convert who had attended college (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2308058,00.html)/

French muslims rioted and started fires for over a week (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4407688.stm).

Should I go on?

The guy who killed JFK had US citizenship.

The guy in waco texas brainwashed a bunch of americans and got everyone pregnant thought he was jesus

A leader who brought a bunch of white members of heaven gate cult into mass suicide was white

Need I go on?

[Geggy]

So kevin does this mean we have to start exterminating the entire white race to prevent another catastrophic and catalyzing events like these, do you think?

[Abcdxxxx]

According to the Israeli human rights group, B'tselem

Btselem is just a Leftist front group known for smearing Israel with inaccurate reports.

Here's an example of what Btselem counts as a non-combative civilian death:

* Jan. 17, 2002: ‘Abd a-Salam Sadeq Hasouna, killed by IDF gunfire after having fire at Israeli civilians in a Hadera banquet hall, killing 6 guests at a bat mitzvah

* Nov. 28, 2002: ‘Omar Mahmoud Abu Rub and Yusef Muhammad Abu Rub, killed by border police gunfure after they entered Beit She’an, opened fire, and killed six Israeli civilians

If indeed this particular story has merit, you're pointing to one outrageous story of Israeli army misconduct and comparing it to an instutionalized standard daily practice in Palestinian society. That's pretty hollow.

The Pope says that Islam is a religion with a history of violence. Followers of Muhammed respond by proving his point.

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

ABC, you and your fucking excuses are laughable.

You ask for evidence, and yet when provided with evidence, you call it "propaganda."

This is an Israeli source. There's no propoganda unless you're trying to tell me that Israelis are trying to get other Israelis by lying.
you're pointing to one outrageous story of Israeli army misconduct
See, exactly what I'm talking about.

You brush things off as, "oh, it's just ONE THING, oh it's just a small group of people" and you don't apply the same thing to your own dumb analysis.

Wake up and smell the roses, sunshine. The theory applies everywhere, not just in your own little biased world where Muslims and Palestinians are inhumane murders and Jews and Israelis are victims of their crimes.

The Pope says that Islam is a religion with a history of violence. Followers of Muhammed respond by proving his point.
Only in your sheltered way of thinking would that be considered "proof." It's an over-reaction by a few people because of some silly statement.

By the way, I dare you to refute this argument. Point by point. No resorting to labels this time, if you wanna just point and say "PROPOGANDA" that's you admitting that you are in fact mistaken. I want to see facts. Arguments. Both sides represented. And most importantly evidence that prove this guy wrong:

By Zeev Maoz, a professor of political science at Tel Aviv university.
There’s practically a holy consensus right now that the war in the North is a just war and that morality is on our side. The bitter truth must be said: this holy consensus is based on short-range selective memory, an introverted worldview, and double standards.

This war is not a just war. Israel is using excessive force without distinguishing between civilian population and enemy, whose sole purpose is extortion. That is not to say that morality and justice are on Hezbollah’s side. Most certainly not. But the fact that Hezbollah “started it” when it kidnapped soldiers from across an international border does not even begin to tilt the scales of justice toward our side.

Let’s start with a few facts. We invaded a sovereign state, and occupied its capital in 1982. In the process of this occupation, we dropped several tons of bombs from the air, ground and sea, while wounding and killing thousands of civilians. Approximately 14,000 civilians were killed between June and September of 1982, according to a conservative estimate. The majority of these civilians had nothing to do with the PLO, which provided the official pretext for the war.

In Operations Accountability and Grapes of Wrath, we caused the mass flight of about 500,000 refugees from southern Lebanon on each occasion. There are no exact data on the number of casualties in these operations, but one can recall that in Operation Grapes of Wrath, we bombed a shelter in the village of Kafr Kana which killed 103 civilians. The bombing may have been accidental, but that did not make the operation any more moral.

On July 28, 1989, we kidnapped Sheikh Obeid, and on May 12, 1994, we kidnapped Mustafa Dirani, who had captured Ron Arad. Israel held these two people and another 20-odd Lebanese detainees without trial, as “negotiating chips.” That which is permissible to us is, of course, forbidden to Hezbollah.

Hezbollah crossed a border that is recognized by the international community. That is true. What we are forgetting is that ever since our withdrawal from Lebanon, the Israel Air Force has conducted photo-surveillance sorties on a daily basis in Lebanese airspace. While these flights caused no casualties, border violations are border violations. Here too, morality is not on our side.

So much for the history of morality. Now, let’s consider current affairs. What exactly is the difference between launching Katyushas into civilian population centers in Israel and the Israel Air Force bombing population centers in south Beirut, Tyre, Sidon and Tripoli? The IDF has fired thousands of shells into south Lebanon villages, alleging that Hezbollah men are concealed among the civilian population. Approximately 25 Israeli civilians have been killed as a result of Katyusha missiles to date. The number of dead in Lebanon, the vast majority comprised of civilians who have nothing to do with Hezbollah, is more than 300.

Worse yet, bombing infrastructure targets such as power stations, bridges and other civil facilities turns the entire Lebanese civilian population into a victim and hostage, even if we are not physically harming civilians. The use of bombings to achieve a diplomatic goal - namely, coercing the Lebanese government into implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1559 - is an attempt at political blackmail, and no less than the kidnapping of IDF soldiers by Hezbollah is the aim of bringing about a prisoner exchange.

There is a propaganda aspect to this war, and it involves a competition as to who is more miserable. Each side tries to persuade the world that it is more miserable. As in every propaganda campaign, the use of information is selective, distorted and self-righteous. If we want to base our information (or shall we call it propaganda?) policy on the assumption that the international environment is going to buy the dubious merchandise that we are selling, be it out of ignorance or hypocrisy, then fine. But in terms of our own national soul searching, we owe ourselves to confront the bitter truth - maybe we will win this conflict on the military field, maybe we will make some diplomatic gains, but on the moral plane, we have no advantage, and we have no special status.

No assumptions. I want facts that convince me that this guy is wrong. Otherwise, you're admitting that you've been grossly misinformed the whole time you were arguing the exact opposite.

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

So kevin does this mean we have to start exterminating the entire white race to prevent another catastrophic and catalyzing events like these, do you think?
The best way to deal with this is to shove them all in the same category. I mean hey, it's done to Muslims, why not the white race too?

Problem solved. :)

[Abcdxxxx]

okay fine, i'm going to take the time to debunk that ridiculous article which you think is beyond refute. i'm indulging you though, since all you're doing is cutting and pasting the standard issue articles from the same typical leftist conspiracy sites.

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

:lol

Looks like ABC is gonna spend extra time glued to Google.

Your "typical leftist conspiracy sites" excuse is beyond hilarious. Your likes attack Geggy for "conspiracy" shit and then resort to exactly the same thing when your own arguments are blown to pieces.

Remember, I want evidence. Not your own dumb opinion.

But what I'm pretty sure you'll do, instead of refuting the actual argument, proving otherwise, is try to look up the time period and gather a bunch of irrelevant shit that happened without really focusing on the issue this guy brought up.

Let's see how you coldly justify thousands of dead people. Oh and tell me, is this a conspiracy too? Must be!

“We, candidates for service and soldiers in the IDF, men and women, as responsible citizens, hereby declare that we will take no part in the continued oppression of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories, and we will not participate in policing actions or in guarding the settlements.”
- http://yeshgvul.org/jail_e.asp

Yesh Gvul arose in response to the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, as growing numbers of soldiers grasped that the campaign, with its bloodshed and havoc, was an act of naked and futile aggression in which they wanted no part.
168 servicemen were jailed, some repeatedly, for refusing to serve in the campaign: the actual number of refusals was far greater, but their rising numbers deterred the army from prosecuting most of the refuseniks. The first Palestinian intifada in 1987 likewise prompted further refusals, with close on 200 jailed, though the army again backed down from jailing many of the recalcitrant soldiers, indicating that refusals were significantly more numerous. A notably high ratio of refuseniks are combat officers (ranking from sergeant to major) i.e. soldiers who have served with distinction.

Oh my, suddenly the number of Israeli sources that don't support your cause are growing.

[Abcdxxxx]

Hey Fuzzy Duke, keep in mind you're asking me to respond to an OPINION piece....and I'm going to debunk it factually, using actual big time books, just like I did when I took on the entire forum here, including Kevin, and Rorschach...and I'm going to predict that in response you'll just go back to cutting and pasting a slew of articles I can find reprinted on Rense, CommonDreams, and DavidDuke.com.

Don't distract from the real issue here - your people are acting like idiots. They're Muslims. They're burning churches and mosques...and it has zippo to do with Israel. But keep on reaffirming the stereotype by twisting this into a conversation about the Zionists.

So um...one request... will you make the same effort to justify the outrage and riots that resulted over the supposedly forbidden artistic usage of Muhammed's likeness?

What was the big deal anyway? http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

[ScruU2wice]

I'm pretty sure we have this same argument everytime Islam and Muslim are mentioned on this board.

Let's just settle the score this one time and just lay down that Islam is an evil and violent religion that has no hope of accomplishing anything but horrible horrible evil. and violence. And that doesn't just stop at a few muslims, the pacifist muslims are just as bad sitting on their asses. Oh yeah and there's nothing you can do about it, because Islam is inherently evil I mean there are literally hundreds of out of context Koranic quotes to back it up. Umm what else am I forgetting? oh yeah cartoons of Prophet Mohammad are hilarious, not for their comical value, but just because they're so edgy, and any Muslim offended at them are flag burning rock throwing Jihadis. Ummm let's see, yeah all muslims should be held under suspicion, for something.

I think we should just establish these axioms before we even start a discussion about islam.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

This is amazing. So, when it comes to this stuff, one guy represents every Muslim in the world. But when it comes to things like Iraq and marines killing civilians "in cold blood," it's just a bunch of marines who don't represent America's overall service in Iraq.

Hey douche bag, you asked "do you see American Muslims, British Muslims, Danish Muslims, French Muslims, etc, resort to these things?", and I answered your question.

You want to be a dumb apologist and equate all of these things with poverty and ignorance. If you don't want to be proven wrong, then shut the hell up.

Oh, and Geggy.....you're adorable. I love it when you pretend to have a clue.

[Abcdxxxx]

Eh, I forgot who I was talking to for a second, I'm not going to waste much time on this....

Let's start with a few facts. We invaded a sovereign state, and occupied its capital in 1982.

Lebanon was far from Soveriegn in 1982, with Arafat and his PLO regrouping from their failed coup attempt in Jordan by occupying Lebanon with 18,000 troops, and another 5,000 foriegn mercenaries. How soveriegn are you with a terrorist group armed with Russian tanks at your border? The PLO was responsible for 275 terror attacks against Israel in 1981, and countless horrific abuses against native Lebanese. When Israel complied with Resolutions 425 (which was issued in 1978, four years before they invaded Beirut) and 426 in 2000, Lebanon had yet to reclaim it’s Southern territory from militia factions.

Approximately 14,000 civilians were killed between June and September of 1982, according to a conservative estimate.

These figures were never varified. Some came from the Palestine Red Crescent, headed by Arafat’s brother. We’re also talking about attributing death tolls for an entire period of civil war, to Israel, who were a third party.

In Operations Accountability and Grapes of Wrath, we caused the mass flight of about 500,000 refugees from southern Lebanon on each occasion. There are no exact data on the number of casualties in these operations, but one can recall that in Operation Grapes of Wrath, we bombed a shelter in the village of Kafr Kana which killed 103 civilians.

Your irrefutable author goes on to admit these deaths were accidental, but it’s because of the memory of these unfortunate casualties that Israel was so quick to accept responsibility in Kana again for what turned out to be falsified and manipulated claims with the fictionalized massacre. The disasterous bombing of 1996 led to disbanding the entire operation, and a precedence for Israel ending their manuevers in vain. This was only two months prior to the vulnerable Israeli elections during the Palestinian peace process, and resulted in ‘the Grapes of Wrath Understanding” of April, 1996, a US proposal which served as the closest thing to a treaty between Lebanon, Syria and Israel. It would also serve as the blueprint for UN Resolution 1559. The moral of that story is to finish what you start, or you will be back where you started irregardless of your own personal wishes.





On July 28, 1989, we kidnapped Sheikh Obeid, and on May 12, 1994, we kidnapped Mustafa Dirani, who had captured Ron Arad. Israel held these two people and another 20-odd Lebanese detainees without trial, as "negotiating chips.

Here the author appears to be inadvertantly arguing that you can’t negotiate with terrorists. Dirani was the subject of succesfull negotiations for a prisoner exchange. Sheikh Obeid was held responsible for kidnapping and murdering an American Colonel who was serving a UN peacekeeping mission, and was used in negotiations. So okay, Israel didn’t get Ron Arad but they did get an Israeli businessman, a group of Israeli Arabs, and the remains of some kidnapped IDF soldiers.

Approximately 25 Israeli civilians have been killed as a result of Katyusha missiles to date. The number of dead in Lebanon, the vast majority comprised of civilians who have nothing to do with Hezbollah, is more than 300.

So Israel’s morality should be weighed by Hezbollah’s ability to kill Jews succesfully? It’s clear that Hezbollah would kill as many Jews as possible if they had the ability and if they could increase death tolls, they would not hesitate to do it. What’s not in dispute is Israel’s ability to wipe Lebanon or Syria off the map if they so desired. But that hasn’t happened, and that puts an end to the question of Israel’s morals.

[imported_I, fuzzbot.]

This is amazing. So, when it comes to this stuff, one guy represents every Muslim in the world. But when it comes to things like Iraq and marines killing civilians "in cold blood," it's just a bunch of marines who don't represent America's overall service in Iraq.

Hey douche bag, you asked "do you see American Muslims, British Muslims, Danish Muslims, French Muslims, etc, resort to these things?", and I answered your question.

You want to be a dumb apologist and equate all of these things with poverty and ignorance. If you don't want to be proven wrong, then shut the hell up.

Oh, and Geggy.....you're adorable. I love it when you pretend to have a clue.

Hey you arrogant piece of dick, a stupid example doesn't prove anything I've said wrong. 24 fucking people out of 2 million British Muslims is still not fucking evidence, how stupid are you? That's like saying religious serial killers like John Wayne Gacey represent Christianity for what they did, and unless you're as ignorant as you come off then you may as well go ahead and equate Christianity with murder.

Geggy does have a clue, you see, if you stopped whining like the bloated piece of shit that you are and started listening to what people have to say, you'd actually start getting a clue too. But you're not willing to listen, and I've yet to see you treat anyone here with respect. You really do know how to debate, huh? :lol

ABC-

Your arguments are full of assumptions. You don't know where he got his figures, yet you don't support your argument at all by telling me why his figures are wrong. You assumed it came froma Palestinian source - how would you know? You don't. Stop assuming, start finding evidence, shitface.

Furthermore, I'm pretty sure an Israeli guy who has lived in Israel all his life, teaches at one of the best Israeli universities has way more to say than just some dumb American Jew. The guy actually lived through it, read his other articles to find out more. Hilarious that you'd dismiss him as a conspiracy theorist, that just makes University of Tel Aviv really dangerous, even if you openly bragged about it before! :lol

Look at all these grown ups guys. They really know what they're talking about and they'll keep kicking until someone stops talking. No evidence, nothing. Just a few insulting words and a threat to lock the thread.

Man, Burbank really needs to start frequenting this place to put these goons back to where they belong.

[Ant10708]

Hey guys, white people kill people too! HAHAHA

Take that Kevin!

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Hey you arrogant piece of dick, a stupid example doesn't prove anything I've said wrong. 24 fucking people out of 2 million British Muslims is still not fucking evidence, how stupid are you? That's like saying religious serial killers like John Wayne Gacey represent Christianity for what they did, and unless you're as ignorant as you come off then you may as well go ahead and equate Christianity with murder.


No,no,no......now you want to twist the argument around because you don't have one.

First you wanted to say that those who act like idiots in the ME are a small, marginalized minority who are ignoraant and poor. You then said look at the other countries, they don't act like this! i showed you that educated, European born people DO indeed act this way. Now what would bind a college educated Briton and one of the poor, ignorant muslims you keep straw manning? Why would the two act for the same purpose? What drives them?

If you want to talk about Christians killing people, let's do it. Christians have had that conversation, it was actually what the fucking pope was talking about. The problem is that your religion is not ready for that talk, so you just IGNORE your bad elements and treat them like children. maybe that works for someone like you, who maybe doesn't have to deal with it where you live. But those children are

There were large protests in Europe over a fucking cartoon. The three examples I gave are the tip of the iceberg.


Geggy does have a clue, you see, if you stopped whining like the bloated piece of shit that you are and started listening to what people have to say, you'd actually start getting a clue too. But you're not willing to listen, and I've yet to see you treat anyone here with respect. You really do know how to debate, huh? :lol

If you actually have read this board, you'd know many of us have tried repeatedly with Geggy, to no avail. And if you think bringing up Waco or something is actually making a point, you're more lost and ignorant than I thought. Are you one of these very few muslims you keep referring to?

[ziggytrix]

I'm pretty sure we have this same argument everytime Islam and Muslim are mentioned on this board.

Let's just settle the score this one time and just lay down that Islam is an evil and violent religion that has no hope of accomplishing anything but horrible horrible evil. and violence. And that doesn't just stop at a few muslims, the pacifist muslims are just as bad sitting on their asses. Oh yeah and there's nothing you can do about it, because Islam is inherently evil I mean there are literally hundreds of out of context Koranic quotes to back it up. Umm what else am I forgetting? oh yeah cartoons of Prophet Mohammad are hilarious, not for their comical value, but just because they're so edgy, and any Muslim offended at them are flag burning rock throwing Jihadis. Ummm let's see, yeah all muslims should be held under suspicion, for something.

I think we should just establish these axioms before we even start a discussion about islam.

That should be sticked as part of the rules for this forum.

[Abcdxxxx]

Geggy does have a clue....

ABC-

Your arguments are full of assumptions. You don't know where he got his figures, yet you don't support your argument at all by telling me why his figures are wrong. You assumed it came froma Palestinian source - how would you know?

Okay so you're validating Geggy and resorting to the "you can't prove it you weren't there" argument. Glad I bothered now. Fuzzbot, people were there, like the International Red Cross who used these figures before eventually denouncing them (June 25, 1982, Washington Post). Arafat's brother was in charge of the Red Crescent who issued these figures. If you want to dispute it, respond with something besides disbelief. One doesn't assume truths, just as one doesn't assume fallacies - one learns them. I pointed out factual errors in his Op-ed piece that you've mistaken for investigative journalism. I hope you can break through that cultural barrier of yours to understand that.


Furthermore, I'm pretty sure an Israeli guy who has lived in Israel all his life, teaches at one of the best Israeli universities has way more to say than just some dumb American Jew. The guy actually lived through it, read his other articles to find out more. Hilarious that you'd dismiss him as a conspiracy theorist

Do you even know what a conspiracy theoriest is? How about a Holocaust denier? See Geggy in the dictionary. I never called your "Israeli guy" a conspiracist, I called him wrong, pointing out why, and accused him of embracing disinformation as many Israeli leftists are prone to do because it fits their agenda. The best you can do is say he's "lived in Israel all his life" - even THAT'S not true.

So h'bout we get this conversation back on track, because your problem still isn't the Zionists, and 49.9% of mid-east Arabs support Bin laden, according to last weeks Al-Jazeera poll. http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aljazeera.net%2FPorta l%2FAspx%2FSurveyResult.aspx&langpair=ar%7Cen&hl=en&newwindow=1&safe=off&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools
And when UK Muslims were polled, 24% said the bus bombings were justified, and 1/3 of all polled wanted to live under Sharia laws in Britain. http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1145782006

[KevinTheOmnivore]

It'll be the Christians living in the Middle East who have their churches bombed and their neighborhoods terrorized
lolz.

Yeah, that's totally what's gonna happen!

I think you're mistaking what's in the news with reality. There's a difference.

Italian nun shot dead in Somalia (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/8A36ACA6-0CD8-4E92-9DF8-CD716EE03310.htm)

Somali Islamists urge Muslims to slay Pope (http://www.kuwaittimes.net/Navariednews.asp?dismode=article&artid=144546027)

Churches firebombed as Muslims demand further apology (http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=195656604&p=y956573yx)


Iran seminaries shut in protest at Pope remarks (http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1053500)

Maybe if we just ignore it, it will all go away, right Fuzzy? Like you said, the Pope already apologized. What more should he do?

[Preechr]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060917/ap_on_re_eu/pope_muslims


It'll be the Christians living in the Middle East who have their churches bombed and their neighborhoods terrorized

Earlier Sunday in the West Bank, two churches were set on fire as anger over the pope's comments grew throughout the Palestinian territories.

In the town of Tulkarem, a 170-year-old stone church was torched before dawn and its interior was destroyed, Christian officials said. In the village of Tubas, a small church was attacked with firebombs and partially burned, Christians said. Neither church is Catholic, the officials said.

Palestinian Muslims hurled firebombs and opened fire at five churches in the West Bank and Gaza Strip Saturday to protest the Pope's comments, sparking concerns of a rift between Palestinian Muslims and Christians.

...

"At this time I wish also to add that I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address at the University of Regensburg, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims," the pope said Sunday.

Muslim leaders in the Mideast gave mixed reactions to the pontiff's apology.

Mahmoud Ashour, the whiny and petulant former deputy of Cairo's Al-Azhar Mosque, the Sunni Arab world's most powerful institution, told Al-Arabiya TV immediately after the pope's speech that, "It is not enough. He should apologize because he insulted the beliefs of Islam. He must apologize in a frank way and say he made a mistake."

Mohammed al-Nujeimi, a bitchy little professor with a brand new handbag at the Institute of Judicial and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, also criticized the pope's statement while being gay.

"The pope does not want to apologize. He is evading apology and what he said today is a repetition of his previous statement," he told Al-Arabiya TV.

The Vatican released a statement Saturday saying the pope "sincerely regrets" that Muslims were offended, but stopped short of the apology demanded by many Muslim leaders.

...

But the leader of Egypt's largest Islamic political group, the Muslim Brotherhood, said that "while anger over the Pope's remarks is necessary, it shouldn't last for long."

"While he is the head of the Catholic Church in the world, many Europeans are not following (the church) so what he said won't influence them. Our relations with Christians should remain good, civilized and cooperative," Mohammed Mahdi Akef told The Associated Press.


Now, does that last bit infer that were the pope more influential his words would have warranted violence?

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

WTF?

The Pope calls some islaamic teachings inhuman and violent. (some of them are)

In response some muslims (and i use the term loosely) respond with INHUMAN VIOLENCE! And the rest of the Muslims int he world hold their head in shame cause someone makes them look like a retard.

I do it everytime someone says christians are deluded retards and then they catch some polygamous child molesting church leader the next day. One rotten apple (okay a LOT of them) makes us all look like retards.

Remind me to use that defense if i ever go to court for murder, i'll just tell the judge "i'm innocent and i'll kill you if you dont say i am"

Reminds me of the stupid comic debaucle this summer.

Idealogy can not be spread by the sword, but by debate and logical reasoning.

War is for defense not "you hurt my feelings"

[mburbank]

Maybe I'm just stung by Kevins katty comments about my not adressing issues, but I thought I'd throw into the mix a link to an article by Christopher Hitchens article on this mess. Once a wild eyed liberal provocateur, he has for these last several years been quite the apologist for both the WAR ON TERROR and Bush. I was surprised to find that Hitch, who is not very sympathetic to Muslims and even less so to people who are, doesn't much care for Ratzenberger either.

While I hold no brief for violence in response to words, I think it would be foolish to suppose that Ratzi wasn't fully aware what he said would be taken as provocative. My question, is what sort of response (beyond the scholarly confines of his immediatte audience) was he looking for? I think that's a worthwhile and interesting question and that the barbaric response his speech has gotten does not make the question vanish. It simply means there are two issues, thematically linked, both worth examining.



http://www.slate.com/id/2149863

also, out of curiosity, Kev, why 'Fury' instead of just fury? They seem furios to me. Do your quotations imply that they are not actually furios, that their fury is about something else entirely or that while they may be furios, they have no right to their fury?

I doubt I disagree, since I think fury is almost always an inappropriatte response, but I won't know until you tell me what you mean.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Because their fury, as usual, is terribly misplaced. Also, if you took Fuzzy for his word, than virtually no muslims are really upset by this.

You're right about Hitchens, though. He is very consistent about his atheism, as annoying as it often can get. I too thought the Pope should've apologized, as I've already said. I don't think it was so much a calculated move, as it was Benedict failing to take into account that he isn't some Vatican academic who is going to have every word scrutinized. He's the figurehead of the faith, and he needs to be smarter about it.

BUT.....the reason he needs to be smarter about it is b/c of the ridiculous response we're seeing right now. So the grand irony in it all is that he quoted a medieval passage talking about the violent nature of Islam, muslims get upset, and then say nothing about the violence enacted against churches! Right, right.....it's so few muslims, just ignore them!

I wish I could set up a good vending business on the "Arab street". I'd make a killing, with how often they take to the streets in self-righteous outrage. The crux of the pope's speech was actually about the secular West. Where are the massive protests in Britain, New York, and LA? Why no church burnings there? Why hasn't a group of rabid secualrists gunned down a nun yet?

[Chojin]

Mohammed al-Nujeimi, a bitchy little professor with a brand new handbag at the Institute of Judicial and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, also criticized the pope's statement while being gay.
lol :<

[mburbank]

Okay. Fair enough.

I think there are just a fairly large number of furious Muslims right now, and furious people tend to point there fury wherever someone sets up a big, convenient target. Misplaced, sure, but predictable. That's why I think people should be furious less.

And Ratzi is a poo poo. It's the first thing I agree with Hitchens about in, like, five years, minimum.

[ItalianStereotype]

It'll be the Christians living in the Middle East who have their churches bombed and their neighborhoods terrorized
lolz.

Yeah, that's totally what's gonna happen!

I think you're mistaking what's in the news with reality. There's a difference.

boy, your face must be red

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

to be honest the pope didn't so much apologize as he said "I'm sorry it offends you" Iran is demanding a retraction.

Of course after seeing the response I don't think he will retract. How many christians go on a murderous rampage when South park air's a Jesus joke? I know a lot get mad, but they keep it in perspective. (well a better perspective then firebombing comedy central)

[Ant10708]

A Pakistani foreign-ministry spokeswoman responded: “Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence.”

[ItalianStereotype]

typical (http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20060919-120633-1744r.htm) Islamic (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200609/INT20060919a.html) reactions (http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2000964,00.html) showing. (http://siteinstitute.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=publications211806&Category=publications&Subcategory=0)

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Time for another Holy League, Eye Tie!

[ItalianStereotype]

Onward, to Constantinople!

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

on the other hand 3 murderous christians in indonesia where executed despite the pope asking for clemencly. The 3 were found duilty of multiple murders and serial killings. I guess all religions can be tards.

Personally I'm glad they were executed though.

Oh and isn't Constantinople Istabmbul now? You know it's turkish delight on a moonlit night.

[ItalianStereotype]

NOT ISTANBUL, NEVER

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

istanbul and constantinople first istanbul then constantinople, even old new york was once new amsterdam, why they changed it i cant say, people just liked it better that way. Istanbul now it's turkish delight on a moonlit night.

[ItalianStereotype]

shush, I do not recognize Fagstanbul.