Oh, that crazy Benedict!

[dys]

So that crazy pope has gone and done the unthinkable. As many of you probably already know, he quoted an ancient text which basically said there are parts of the islamic writings that inspire violence. This, in turn, caused gigantic uproar from the Islamichood because it simply isn't true! In fact, in order to show their disagreement with the pope, some Muslims have decided to vow war (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-09-18T124423Z_01_L18623697_RTRUKOC_0_US-POPE-ISLAM.xml&src=rss) in order to prove just how wrong he is.

Other incidences have led to speculation that a recently slain nun (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060917/wl_nm/somalia_italian_dc_3) was murdered in retalliation to Benedict's comments.

How dare he claim Islam isn't all about the warm and the fuzzy!

Additionaly, it's been publicized (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/09/18/060918122115.gk5kso8d.html) by a peaceful nation's government that, of course, the pope's comments were perhaps even inspired by the United States and Israel! Of course, it's all beginning to make sense now. The zionist pigs put the pope up to it in effort to conspire a new religious crusade.
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei joined a chorus of Muslim criticism of the head of the world's 1.1 billion Roman Catholics, calling the Pope's remarks "the latest chain of the crusade against Islam started by America's (George W.) Bush".
Ultimately, though, all fault rests on the pope's shoulders. How dare he cross the invisible line, which prohibits all non-muslims from remotely linking islam to any acts of violence whatsoever.

In closing, I share a few excerpts.

The group said Muslims would be victorious and addressed the pope as "the worshipper of the cross" saying "you and the West are doomed as you can see from the defeat in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya and elsewhere. ... We will break up the cross, spill the liquor and impose head tax, then the only thing acceptable is a conversion (to Islam) or (killed by) the sword."

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20060918/i/r655571931.jpg?x=236&y=345&sig=SZP7HbPwfOLmFENvFcoK4g--

BUT WE'RE SO PEACECFUL!


Thoughts?

[Yesbama]

It's still important to understand and acknowledge that Islam is a peaceful religion as a whole, most muslims are peaceful people living their lives.

It's the fundamentalist's and their leaders who are in the wrong. But the hypocrisy in the sources you found is incredible.

[Ignatz]

Islamic crusaders are in the process of attempting to take over the world. Just realize this. If they were truly unified, and any good at military strategy, they would be knocking on our door right now.

Having said that, realize also that America has also attempted to take over the world in the last 50 years through economic and social imperialism, and we've been largely successful. The only real difference is, we don't cut off as many heads.

[MidnightStalker]

Or any at all, for that matter.

-----------------------------------------

"In the international context we are living at present, the Catholic Church continues convinced that, to foster peace and understanding between peoples and men, it is necessary and urgent that religions and their symbols be respected." - Pope Benedict XVI (2005).

"'Show me just what Muhammad 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.'" - Pope Benedict XVI (2006).


The group said Muslims would be victorious and addressed the pope as "the worshipper of the cross" saying "you and the West are doomed as you can see from the defeat in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya and elsewhere. ... We will break up the cross, spill the liquor and impose head tax, then the only thing acceptable is a conversion (to Islam) or (killed by) the sword."
You're funny to quote an al Qaeda-linked extremist group to represent the majority of the peace seaking muslims.

[Nine]

AAAGGH!! WE'RE NOT VIOLENT!! *burns down an orphanage*

[xero]

*sigh*

BEHEAD ALL THOSE WHO SAY ISLAM IS VIOLENT.

[koruptid]

It's still important to understand and acknowledge that Islam is a peaceful religion as a whole, most muslims are peaceful people living their lives.

It's the fundamentalist's and their leaders who are in the wrong. But the hypocrisy in the sources you found is incredible.

I have the utmost respect for Islam, but there are few religions I would deem wholly "peaceful," and Islam certainly isn't one of them. After its conception, it was spread primarily by campaigns of conquest started by Muhammad.

Historically, Christianity and Judeaism are not much better. The difference is that Christians gave up crusades over 700 years ago.

Yes, the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful. But it's hard to place the blame solely on the fundamentalists and leaders. Consider: If the Pope started a call for the destruction of Islam, what would be the response in Europe and North America? I don't foresee many nuns being shot.

"'Show me just what Muhammad 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.'" - Pope Benedict XVI (2006).
That's a direct quote from a Byzantine emperor.

[Express]

Or any at all, for that matter.

-----------------------------------------

"In the international context we are living at present, the Catholic Church continues convinced that, to foster peace and understanding between peoples and men, it is necessary and urgent that religions and their symbols be respected." - Pope Benedict XVI (2005).

"'Show me just what Muhammad 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.'" - Pope Benedict XVI (2006).

Lets do a little review here and get things into the proper context.
"On Tuesday, Benedict delivered what some church experts said was a defining speech of his pontificate, saying that the West, and specifically Europe, had become so beholden to reason that it had closed God out of public life, science and academia.

He began his speech at Regensburg University with what he conceded were "brusque" words about Islam: He quoted a 14th-century Byzantine emperor as having said: "Show me just what Muhammad 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."

The pope then used the word jihad, or holy war, saying that violence was contrary to God's nature and to reason.

But at the end of a speech that did not otherwise mention Islam, he also said that reason could be the basis for "that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/14/news/pope.php

He's trying to get the Islamic Religious leaders to answer the question wether murder can be supported by any faith. And then wether there can be co-existence with other faiths?

Is it not true that brutal atrocities are being committed in the name of Islam?
Does not a religion that does not immediately pubilicly denounce the senseless violence in God's name lose all moral clarity.
Add how there are close relationships I believe with Islam, Catholic and the Jewish faith, All being "Children of the Book".
But I am getting tired of it all I do not think anymore apologizing is necessary
Oh wait;
An elderly Italian nun who devoted her life to helping the sick in Africa was shot dead by two gunmen at a hospital Sunday in an attack possibly linked to worldwide Muslim anger toward
Pope Benedict XVI
Shot in the back, where is the outrage over that?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060917/ap_on_re_af/somalia_nun_killed
Or the forced conversions at gunpoint? The beheadings?
Either the Islamic religion undergoes a drastic reformation soon!
Or some Isalmic Fascist's asassinates the Pope and sends us all in the depths of a world war.

You're funny to quote an al Qaeda-linked extremist group to represent the majority of the peace seaking muslims.
Here are few more practitioners of the "Relgion of peace"
“We swear to God to send you people who adore death as much as you adore life,” The statement was addressed to “you dog of Rome” and threatens to “shake your thrones and break your crosses in your home.”

[Zogo]

why should pope sidious apologize? it's obvious that catholics and most muslims share little in common and they both hate each other..

[MidnightStalker]

That's a direct quote from a Byzantine emperor.
That's what the apostrophes within the quotation marks mean. 'Means those words come directly out of the mouth of the Pope, as a quote from a medieval text.

“We swear to God to send you people who adore death as much as you adore life,” The statement was addressed to “you dog of Rome” and threatens to “shake your thrones and break your crosses in your home.”
Once again, a quote from terrorist insurgents (extremists at best) as a representation of the Islamic faith. Keep 'em coming.

[MV8]

Catholics don't hate, they forgive the sinner's around them, (even if the sinners don't want them too) and pray for the well being of those who do them harm.

Or some crap like that...

[Tone-Loc]

I have great respect for most Muslims that I have come across, directly or not, over the years. I have had an interest in Islam for years, dating back to my younger days when I was questioning my own faith (or rather the need of it), and first really learned of Islam (sadly) through the converted Hakeem Olajuwon... (remember he was an angry hard-ass in his early NBA days prior to his conversion).

At any rate... I really want to try and place the blame for bad rap that Islam is getting these days on just the extremists. I think, even in the last 100 years there have been extremists who have done evil things in the name of Christianity. But then I start to think about who spoke out against them, and greatly stopped their efforts, and wherever they continue to exist, who continues to oppose them?

I am pretty sure I don't recall the vast majority of good Christians sitting idly by and letting everyone else clean up the mess, at least when all was said and done. I just don't get the indication that the "vast majority of Muslims" are doing what others have done, when their faith(s) and/or ideals have been hijacked by extremists to commit evil acts. Maybe there hasn't been a watershed moment to really ignite the vast majority of Muslims to oppose the extremists. But how long is it going to be before they do, so I don't have to wonder if the extremists really aren't as extreme as the vast majority is reported to be.

How sad...

[koruptid]

That's what the apostrophes within the quotation marks mean. 'Means those words come directly out of the mouth of the Pope, as a quote from a medieval text.
Yeah, I know. I was just making sure everyone else realizes it.

[Obscure]

How many suicide bombers does the Pope command?

[stas]

youd think enough acts of violence after such a speech would address the fact that this is not just extremism...this is the one religion in the world that cant seem to get over itself.

[dys]

Once again, a quote from terrorist insurgents (extremists at best) as a representation of the Islamic faith. Keep 'em coming.

Well I would have quoted some "non-extremists" but you know what? I couldn't find any. Do me a favor and give me some quotes from the non-extremists outside of this country that denounce the words and violence surrounding the pope's speach. Show me some leaders, of the peaceful, stating that they do not condone such actions and will work their hardest to put an end to it. While you're doing that, actually read the link I provided for what Khamenei had to say. Show me one islamic leader trying diplomacy in efforts to maintain coexistence between cultures. Why, if the peaceful are not of similar beliefs as the extremists, do they not revolt? Or elect such people into leadership? Why the hell should the rest of the world clean up after the extremists while the "peaceful and helpless" ones idle on the sideline?

Btw, great post, Tone.

[AntioK]

Glory to the Olive!

Setting the stage for judgement day, im liking it.....

[xero]

I'm with dys on this one.

I think this concept of a 'silent and peaceful Muslim majority' simply does not exist. I think it's something people say to be politically correct when addressing the culture as a whole, but I simply don't think it's true, nor have I ever seen any evidence to substantiate the claim that there's a 'silent majority' of non-extremists.

I've never been given one single credible source that references some large population of followers of Islam outside the United States that condemns the actions of all the followers who basically use violence as the first and only resort.

I'd be willing to wager that 25-35% of followers of Islam are non-violent. And that's pretty decent. But it isn't decent that they don't stand up and condemn their fellow Muslims in their horrific acts of violence against the innocent.

[MidnightStalker]

Well I would have quoted some "non-extremists" but you know what? I couldn't find any. Do me a favor and give me some quotes from the non-extremists outside of this country
The protesters held banners that read "Either apologize or don't come."
It is not uncommon for individuals or organizations in Turkey to seek legal action against world leaders whose actions they disapprove of.

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan has described the pope's comments on Islam as "ugly."

"What the pontiff did was a mistake. To say the least, he has hurt the Turkish masses with religious sensitivities," Cevik wrote on Monday.

The ministry said King Mohammed VI sent a written message to the pope denouncing his "offending statements."

"We feel he has committed a grave error against us and that this mistake will only be removed through a personal apology,"

Outside the Palestinian Embassy in Jakarta, police looked on as protesters stood behind the gates waving flags while organizer Heri Budianto shouted, "God is great."

[In Indonesia] more than 100 people rallied in front of the heavily guarded Vatican Embassy in Jakarta, waving banners that said the "Pope is building religion on hatred."

More than 200 Muslims staged a sit-in at a shrine in Damascus, Syria, heeding a call by the Damascus office of Iran's spiritual leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

"This has gravely hurt the feelings of the Muslims across the world, including those from China," Chen Guangyuan, president of Islamic Association of China.

"inadequate and not commensurate with the moral damage caused to Muslims' feelings." (Mahmoud al-Mashhadani on the Pope's apology).

"Muslims have all this while felt oppressed, and the statement by the pope saying he is sorry about the angry reaction is inadequate to calm the anger -- more so because he is the highest leader of the Vatican," Malaysian Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar said.

"a personal and clear apology to 1.5 billion Muslims in this world for the insult caused by his lecture. ..."
But the cleric asked for an end to attacks on churches in the area after seven were vandalized this weekend.

"The Vatican must now take full responsibility over the matter and carry out the necessary steps to rectify the mistake."

"(The) Pope has linked Islam to violence and challenged jihad (holy war) at a time when he apparently closed his eyes to the crimes being perpetrated against defenseless Muslims by the leaders of power and hypocrisy under flag of Christianity and Jewish religion."

The Organization of the Islamic Conference, in a statement released Thursday, said it "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.'" [...] "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."

Bardakoglu said Thursday that he expected an apology from the pope and said it was Christianity, not Islam, that popularized conversion by the sword. "The church and the Western public, because they saw Islam as the enemy, went on crusades. They occupied Istanbul, they killed thousands of people. Orthodox Christians and Jews were killed and tortured." [. . .] "They (the Christians) saw war against those outside the Christian world as a holy duty," Bardakoglu continued. "That's why the Western clerics always have in the back of their minds a crusade mentality and the idea of holy war," he claimed. Bardakoglu said he suspected Benedict had the same mentality, and asked the pope to "look in the mirror" before making remarks against Islam. Ali Bardakoglu, head of the Diyanet, has criticized the pope's remarks but has also welcomed his subsequent apology.

"The world listens carefully to the words of any pope. And it is tragic and dangerous when one sows pain, either deliberately or carelessly," (Times, inside USA).

--------------------------



Now from what I can tell, these all seem peaceful, or at the very least non-violent. I can understand why you'd like to focus on the more violent side of the issues, by quoting extremists and such (who are also condemned by a majority of Muslims). The media, after all, likes to focus on these people as well, as it is a general trend they tend to follow. This is why when you turn on your TV you are most likely to see the media focusing on the more sinister side of human action (whether it be crime in your own city, or the actions or quotes of religious extremists). These people, however, do not represent an entire group as a whole. After all, I'm sure you find it unfair for some people to judge all Americans based on the policy President Bush has created. Should we base all of our assumptions of Christains and their beliefs on the quotes of Pat Robertson who is quoted for saying "If [Chavez] thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it"?

It is dangerous to make such generalizations. They're called stereotypes, and I'm sure you learned about them in elementary school.

[xero]

In reference to the post above (too much to quote):

The Vatican only owes something to the Catholics.

They don't owe anything to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Indonesia, Germany, or even Italy. Only to Catholics.

The notion that every time someone, whether it be a Danish newspaper or the Pope, says or does something the Muslims find offensive, they break out in riots and protest and commit acts of unspeakable violence (the death of the nun was confirmed as commited by Muslim extremists in response to the Pope's speech). This is ridiculous. Their governments already restrict free speech within their countries. They should not be given the opportunity to restrict ours here.

[MightyCawdoR]

Until the so called "silent majority" of Islam does something to cleanse the extremists out, then Muslims will always be viewed by most people as evil cowardly shits.

[MV8]

Now from what I can tell, these all seem peaceful, or at the very least non-violent. I can understand why you'd like to focus on the more violent side of the issues, by quoting extremists and such (who are also condemned by a majority of Muslims). The media, after all, likes to focus on these people as well, as it is a general trend they tend to follow. This is why when you turn on your TV you are most likely to see the media focusing on the more sinister side of human action (whether it be crime in your own city, or the actions or quotes of religious extremists). These people, however, do not represent an entire group as a whole. After all, I'm sure you find it unfair for some people to judge all Americans based on the policy President Bush has created. Should we base all of our assumptions of Christains and their beliefs on the quotes of Pat Robertson who is quoted for saying "If [Chavez] thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it"?

It is dangerous to make such generalizations. They're called stereotypes, and I'm sure you learned about them in elementary school.


Such a peaceful, fun loving people. They only want to be our friends...

http://www.prophetofdoom.net/quotes.aspx?g=405

[MidnightStalker]

Did you even read the disclaimer before you posted the link?

"Before you use or criticize these quotes, please read this overview from the author."

"The “Muhammad’s Own Words” appendix isn’t the best way to learn about Muhammad or to understand his Qur’an.
[. . .]
This appendix is not designed to replace the book. It is an aid for those who have read the book."

Some the quotes aren't necessarily as terrible as you'd like to think, especially since a lot are taken out of context.

“The Messenger and those who believe with him, strive hard and fight with their wealth and lives in Allah’s Cause.” So? Simply stating that Muhammad and believers fought in God's cause. People fight for the cause of God in the Bible.

“He said, ‘Fight them so that there is no more rebellion, and religion, all of it, is for Allah only. Allah must have no rivals.’” Remember, Allah is simply means God, the same God of Christianity and Judaism. There are similar quotes in the Bible.

“I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify to the fact that there is no god but Allah, and believe in me (that) I am the Messenger and in all that I have brought.” Christians also believe in no god but God, and that Jesus was His Messenger.

“The Prophet said: ‘I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and they establish prostration prayer, and pay Zakat. If they do it, their blood and property are protected.’” See above. If you believe in Jesus and God, you are to live eternity in Heaven.

I could go on, but I won't. I'm not here to state that Islam is the perfect religion with absolutely no violence in its history. I'm not Muslim for that matter either. But I have a problem when people come thinking that their religion is absolutely perfect and non-violent. Christianity comes with one of the bloodiest pasts. People fought in the name of Jesus and God, much like people have fought in the name of Muhammad and God (Allah). Today, there are violent Muslims just like there are violent Christians. If the last statistics I looked at were correct, more of the United State's inmates believe in Chrisitianity than any other religion.

[Outflow]

I agree with MightyCadwoR... if that's possible.

[Scorcher]

“The Prophet said: ‘I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and they establish prostration prayer, and pay Zakat. If they do it, their blood and property are protected.’” See above. If you believe in Jesus and God, you are to live eternity in Heaven.

I could go on, but I won't. I'm not here to state that Islam is the perfect religion with absolutely no violence in its history. I'm not Muslim for that matter either. But I have a problem when people come thinking that their religion is absolutely perfect and non-violent. Christianity comes with one of the bloodiest pasts. People fought in the name of Jesus and God, much like people have fought in the name of Muhammad and God (Allah). Today, there are violent Muslims just like there are violent Christians. If the last statistics I looked at were correct, more of the United State's inmates believe in Chrisitianity than any other religion.

Why are you trying to establish similarities in Islam and Christianity when they are extremely different? They both believe in a prophet and a God, and I'm not seeing in that quote where Christians will go to heaven because they believe in Jesus and their God. I'm pretty sure he wants to convert Christians or kill them.

And yes Christianity was an extremely violent religion in the past, there isn't any denying that, but nowadays you're not seeing many Christians going on a crusade to Jerusalem are you? Therein lies the difference, Christianity has gotten over itself and integrated with society peacefully, whereas Islam has not(or at least the violent ones, which seem to be in every country). It's time for them to drop their outdated beliefs and modernize.

That last stat is shocking! That the majority of the inmates in the US are Christian! Wow, maybe the majority of the US is Christian. I wonder if the majority of inmates in Thailand are Buddhist, or the majority of inmates in Israel are Jewish (probably Muslim). And maybe, just maybe the majority of inmates in India are Hindu.

[dys]

Now from what I can tell, these all seem peaceful, or at the very least non-violent. I can understand why you'd like to focus on the more violent side of the issues, by quoting extremists and such (who are also condemned by a majority of Muslims). The media, after all, likes to focus on these people as well, as it is a general trend they tend to follow. This is why when you turn on your TV you are most likely to see the media focusing on the more sinister side of human action (whether it be crime in your own city, or the actions or quotes of religious extremists). These people, however, do not represent an entire group as a whole. After all, I'm sure you find it unfair for some people to judge all Americans based on the policy President Bush has created. Should we base all of our assumptions of Christains and their beliefs on the quotes of Pat Robertson who is quoted for saying "If [Chavez] thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it"?

It is dangerous to make such generalizations. They're called stereotypes, and I'm sure you learned about them in elementary school.
You're right, i agree. And that's why I didn't say every muslim out there is the devil in disguise. I also understand that within your quotes that you found afterwards (thanks for finding some btw) that there wasn't necessarily violence taking place amidst the situations described, just temper tantrums. But you still don't have any quotes where those supposed peaceful ones denounce the violence. Noone (that I have seen/read) says "hey, i disagree with what the pope said but these guys threatening his life and the life of others do not represent my views and that I do not agree with them."

And just to expand on that a little bit, let us not underestimate the amount of people that DO wish harm and a violent end upon the pope. It's not just a handful of people, it's quite literally thousands. So exactly at what point do we start to accept the fact that there are plenty of muslims out there that claim islam calls for such actions and acknowledge that they do in fact represent the religion in some way? I'm not going to be hypocritial and claim christianity has been and always been perfect, but it's evolved.

While I did focus my original post around the violent scenes, I admit that I left out the part about how I think most muslims DO need to get over themselves as stas pointed out and stop whining over every little thing that may not go their way. I think for many of them it's time to grow up and realize that the world does not revolve around them and their religion. It doesn't for anyone, nor their religion. I am not christian, I'm not a follower of the pope and I'm obviously not muslim. I fault religion with a massive percentage for most of the heinous events committed throughout humanity's history. But you don't see me organizing a sit-in at every church's steps. You won't see me going out to kill and threaten everyone that doesn't agree with me.

Let's get something straight though, even after admitting that I'm not a religious man, I'd tend to think the pope is a pretty good guy, yeah? Anyone that can truely be pissed off by the pope really needs a reality check, especially when it's obviously been taken out of context and even moreso when the hypocrisy that has followed is just so blatant.

[shaggy]

Ya it's only the crazy muslim fundamentalists that are violent!!! I mean just look how well the Muslims treat the jews in Muslim ruling countries. It's almost inspiring ;)

[}tHoL{-Bout2plucku]

yet another reason to ignore the pope

[Clank]

how dare he state the obvious, and then be proven right.

[Express]

Back up for the Pope :)
Lord Carey, who as Archbishop of Canterbury became a pioneer in Christian-Muslim dialogue, himself quoted a contemporary political scientist, Samuel Huntington, who has said the world is witnessing a “clash of civilisations”.

Arguing that Huntington’s thesis has some “validity”, Lord Carey quoted him as saying: “Islam’s borders are bloody and so are its innards. The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilisation whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power.”

Lord Carey went on to argue that a “deep-seated Westophobia” has developed in recent years in the Muslim world.

THE former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey of Clifton has issued his own challenge to “violent” Islam in a lecture in which he defends the Pope’s “extraordinarily effective and lucid” speech.

Lord Carey said that Muslims must address “with great urgency” their religion’s association with violence. He made it clear that he believed the “clash of civilisations” endangering the world was not between Islamist extremists and the West, but with Islam as a whole.

“We are living in dangerous and potentially cataclysmic times,” he said. “There will be no significant material and economic progress [in Muslim communities] until the Muslim mind is allowed to challenge the status quo of Muslim conventions and even their most cherished shibboleths.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2366419,00.html

Brave Soul but with a death wish.

Just found this, provide some insight into the Pope;
Benedict believes passionately that people of faith in general, and Catholics in particular, must either fight for their corner in the intellectual arena or shut up shop
http://www.nysun.com/article/39849?page_no=1

[MidnightStalker]

You're right, i agree. And that's why I didn't say every muslim out there is the devil in disguise. I also understand that within your quotes that you found afterwards (thanks for finding some btw) that there wasn't necessarily violence taking place amidst the situations described, just temper tantrums. But you still don't have any quotes where those supposed peaceful ones denounce the violence. Noone (that I have seen/read) says "hey, i disagree with what the pope said but these guys threatening his life and the life of others do not represent my views and that I do not agree with them."

But the cleric asked for an end to attacks on churches in the area after seven were vandalized this weekend.


What I believe the problem to be, amonst those who are comitting acts of violence in the wake of the Pope's comments, is that they feel the Pope is conspiring with the West in teaching of intolerance against Islam and its followers. I don't think they're so much offended by the comment but more (what they view as) the purpose of the comment. Viewed from this standpoint, it's not so much irony as idiotism that's transpiring. Legitimate Muslims, of course, feel differently and are simply offended by the statements, for whatever their reasons.

[Cyberdemon]

muslims is a religion of blow shit up

Btw, great post, Tone.

There were two mentioned on the opinion page of this morning's NYT, for starters.

There are hopeful examples of such leadership. Muhammad Habash, head of the center for Islamic studies in Damascus, acknowledged Muslims’ shock at the pope’s remarks but said that now “it is our turn to call for calming the situation.” The top Islamic cleric in Turkey, Ali Bardakoglu, who had sharply criticized the pope, accepted the apology. He said Benedict’s “expression of sadness is a sign that he would work for world peace.”

[xero]

What I believe the problem to be, amonst those who are comitting acts of violence in the wake of the Pope's comments, is that they feel the Pope is conspiring with the West in teaching of intolerance against Islam and its followers. I don't think they're so much offended by the comment but more (what they view as) the purpose of the comment. Viewed from this standpoint, it's not so much irony as idiotism that's transpiring. Legitimate Muslims, of course, feel differently and are simply offended by the statements, for whatever their reasons.There should be hostility and intolerance towards [this breed] of Islam and its followers.

"I WANT TO CONVERT YOU ALL TO MY OVERTLY OPPRESSIVE RELIGION. IF YOU DO NOT CONVERT, WE WILL TORTURE AND KILL YOU, FOR YOU ARE AN INFIDEL. BEHEAD ALL THOSE WHO SAY ISLAM IS VIOLENT!"

"Well that's just wonderful. I am tolerant of your views!"

*explosions occur*

...

Tolerance of such a belief system and mindset is completely inexcusable. And dangerous.

And just as disclosure since you seem to be new to the Academy: I am an extremely religion-hostile athiest. The more you get into my business of believing there is absolutely positively no fucking God of any kind (and that as a result I want nothing to do with your religion in any way, shape, or form as I live my own tiny unimportant life), the more I don't like you. That puts violent radical Islam at the top of my "Fuck your religion, you guys suck" list with Southern Baptists.

edit: In fact, just to show how frustrated I am with this whole thing, I'm going to go draw a picture of Mohammad with a dick up his ass in MS Paint right now. And there's nothing anybody can [or should be able to] do to stop me.

edit 2: I'm not really going to do that, I'm too lazy. But it's the thought that counts!

[MidnightStalker]

Of course there should be intolerance toward extremists and terrorists, regardless of their religion.

However, what I stated was that these extremists and terrorists believe the Pope is trying to undermine the Islam religion as a whole. And since these extremist and terrorist label themselves as Muslims, they are comitting terrible violence in the name of Islam, unrightfully so.

This, however, is not the mindset of the ordinary and legitimate Muslim. To say intolerance of Islam should be taught is unfair to these people, and simply undermines the fact that a select few do not represent a whole.

[xero]

I've already stated that I don't believe in the 'silent majority' theory.

I'll believe it when they rise up and fucking do something. Until then, they're going to continue to be represented by those violent crazy fuckheads already running amok.

[VeeKaChu]

Great piece on this here- http://www.slate.com/id/2149885/ - which I fully endorse. Basically, it says that 'the world' needs to stop apologizing for saying things that inflame 'Islam', and start insisting on it's right to free speech without them getting their panties in a bunch over every percieved insult, as well as a more unified response to islamic intolerance, e.g.-

When Saudi Arabia publishes textbooks commanding good Wahhabi Muslims to "hate" Christians, Jews, and non-Wahhabi Muslims, for example, why shouldn't the Vatican, the Southern Baptists, Britain's chief rabbi, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations all condemn them—simultaneously. Equally, I see no reason why Swedish social democrats, British conservatives, and Dutch liberals couldn't occasionally forget their admittedly deep differences and agree unanimously that the practices of female circumcision and forced child marriage are totally unacceptable, whether in Somalia or Stockholm. Surely on this issue they all agree.

[MV8]

Great piece on this here- http://www.slate.com/id/2149885/ - which I fully endorse. Basically, it says that 'the world' needs to stop apologizing for saying things that inflame 'Islam', and start insisting on it's right to free speech without them getting their panties in a bunch over every percieved insult, as well as a more unified response to islamic intolerance, e.g.-


That right there folks, is the truth.

[shaggy]

Great piece on this here- http://www.slate.com/id/2149885/ - which I fully endorse. Basically, it says that 'the world' needs to stop apologizing for saying things that inflame 'Islam', and start insisting on it's right to free speech without them getting their panties in a bunch over every percieved insult, as well as a more unified response to islamic intolerance, e.g.-


I totally agree.

[MidnightStalker]

I agree with free speech, as it is something I've grown accustomed to in America. I don't think it's something many middle eastern Muslims have grown up with. But I fully agree with the idea of free speech, whether you're insulting someone or simply voicing your opinions. For the same reason, I believe the Muslims have right to speak out against whatever they feel fit. Just because someone has the free right to say something, doesn't mean the other person doesn't have the free right to rebut. That's hypocritical.

[xero]

For the same reason, I believe the Muslims have right to speak out against whatever they feel fit. Just because someone has the free right to say something, doesn't mean the other person doesn't have the free right to rebut. That's hypocritical.But the Muslims aren't saying something. They're bombing embassies and killing people and rioting, with their clerics calling for jihad.

There's a vast difference between saying "We respectfully disagree with your view of Islam, and feel your statements are overly generalized, and may be construed as harmful to our culture and society" and saying "DEATH TO AMERICA" and burning down the nearest US Embassy you can find.

There's been none of the former and a whole lot of the latter. Can you explain that to me?

[MidnightStalker]

Please refer to my third post in this thread.

[shaggy]

I agree with free speech, as it is something I've grown accustomed to in America. I don't think it's something many middle eastern Muslims have grown up with. But I fully agree with the idea of free speech, whether you're insulting someone or simply voicing your opinions. For the same reason, I believe the Muslims have right to speak out against whatever they feel fit. Just because someone has the free right to say something, doesn't mean the other person doesn't have the free right to rebut. That's hypocritical.

LOL freedom of speach is great and all, but the Muslims use threats, which even in America is against the law. The problem with muslims is their lack of diplomacy, which stems from their inability to cope with other cultures.

[PHISH]

Media is very selective in what they put in a story, whatever is eyecatching, and more controversial is going to make it into a story, specifically the headline..
I just can't get over that one of you actually thinks that maybe 25-35% of muslims are non-violent? I mean how did you mean that? The presumption being that the remainder are of this extremist jihad..is that actually the common perception in America? I thought people knew better but I just can't believe people would actually think that...I mean do you actually swallow up the constant flood of the eXXXTTTREME things 'journalists' can skim off to pad a story? What is your actual perception of life in these countries and in this culture?

This plays in all directions with the media, it can be completely seperate from any percieved agenda. In fact you don't have to look any further than american papers framing the pope's quote as him directly saying 'Show me just what Muhammad 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.' It was taken out of context and totally blowing it out of proportion, making it sound a lot worse than it was, considering he was quoting someone else and placing it in his own context... I sincerely doubt most people are even aware of his actual full speech- I didn't even get to the reality of his speech until I had dug deeper through 4 or 5 news sources.. See how it distorts the realities of situations? Now consider this same selective reporting in what you are reading coming out of the middle east- to think it represents the majority of the muslim culture is a complete misnomer. The vast majority of these people have jobs, watch tv, play sports just like you do, and aren't set out to 'kill your families!", they are just living their lives. The real thing at play here, discounting media inflation, is the current situation has given these extremists a megaphone, and in an unstable environment extremists always have the ability to bring more people along for the ride... and there is reason besides a good story to give lots of attention to these people in the media, afterall they are a threat...just re-think the perception that it's the majority who are jihading against your families...come on.

And America is home to plenty of its own extremists of the same nature, it's just inherent in any cross-section of the population. We are just fortunate enough to have a relatively stable economic and political situation, and there is little war on our own soil, 2 or 3 more 9/11 like situations and they'd be out of the woodwork and have significant power preaching for extermination of muslims (the extremist response) versus going after the terrorists that did it. Do you think it'd be difficult to find Americans to quote similar things? It'd be easier- you can get them now even, they just don't have a significant voice.

[Stayne]

And yes Christianity was an extremely violent religion in the past, there isn't any denying that, but nowadays you're not seeing many Christians going on a crusade to Jerusalem are you?

Christians aren't oppressed, aren't having thier countries invaded, thier resources destroyed and/or exported, aren't having thier goverments overthrown and remaining in a state of constant political turmoil and civil war.

Now, in this narrow sliver of time that we see, christians appear to be the more peaceful. If the tables were turned and the christians were the ones being oppressed and invaded, I wager that the reaction of the christians would be no different from the reaction we are seeing from muslims. (As for christians not killing over religious differences for 700 years, you only need to look back less than 200 years to when the Mormons were being persecuted and killed and kicked out of thier homes by mobs belonging to a different faith. The Mormons were kicked out of what was at the time the united states and forced to live in the utah territory. All of that was due to nothing but religious differences. So, don't be so self-righteous.)

There is a lot more going on with today's turmoil than a religious quarrel. To try to characterize it as simply a religious issue is short-sighted and ignorant.

Right now, fundamentalist christianity is actually being overtly supported by the US goverment. That support and the zionist views of our administration also exacerbate the issue in the middle east. I don't know how anyone could be surprised that muslims, who were hunted down and killed by christian crusaders before, might get a little upset about christain nations invading thier lands.

What I'm trying to say is that the religion is merely a thing the people have in common. Its somethign that binds the group together to allow them to work/fight together. Its not the reason they fight.

[xero]

Phish,

I believe the vast majority of Muslims living in industrialized and westernized nations are unsupportive of this violent extremism.

That makes up between 25% and 35% of the overall Muslim population. The other 65-75% live in North Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia. They've consistently proven over the last thousand years or so that they're anything but non-violent. And with the spread of the information age, it's become especially pronounced in the last 50-60 years (coinciding with the creation of Israel, and the explosion of oil use).

Whether or not the citizens are actively being violent bastards or are just so uneducated that they do everything their clerics tell them to do is irrelevant. Until they stand up and take control of their lives, they're a part of the problem, not part of the solution.

All I've said this whole time is prove me wrong. Find this silent majority. Give me some sort of empirical evidence that it exists, because I sure as fuck can't find it.

[Stayne]

ps. The pope is never going to appologize. He's the fucking pope! he's infallible!

[stas]

Christians aren't oppressed, aren't having thier countries invaded, thier resources destroyed and/or exported, aren't having thier goverments overthrown and remaining in a state of constant political turmoil and civil war.

Now, in this narrow sliver of time that we see, christians appear to be the more peaceful. If the tables were turned and the christians were the ones being oppressed and invaded, I wager that the reaction of the christians would be no different from the reaction we are seeing from muslims. (As for christians not killing over religious differences for 700 years, you only need to look back less than 200 years to when the Mormons were being persecuted and killed and kicked out of thier homes by mobs belonging to a different faith. The Mormons were kicked out of what was at the time the united states and forced to live in the utah territory. All of that was due to nothing but religious differences. So, don't be so self-righteous.)

There is a lot more going on with today's turmoil than a religious quarrel. To try to characterize it as simply a religious issue is short-sighted and ignorant.

Right now, fundamentalist christianity is actually being overtly supported by the US goverment. That support and the zionist views of our administration also exacerbate the issue in the middle east. I don't know how anyone could be surprised that muslims, who were hunted down and killed by christian crusaders before, might get a little upset about christain nations invading thier lands.

What I'm trying to say is that the religion is merely a thing the people have in common. Its somethign that binds the group together to allow them to work/fight together. Its not the reason they fight.

you are wrong on many accounts, but since you were trying to make a point, we'll overlook those factual discrepencies.

[ohman]

you are wrong on many accounts, but since you were trying to make a point, we'll overlook those factual discrepencies.
The factual discrepancies he makes are actually minimal. We really are seeing a huge anti-Western streak develop in many places throughout the globe, and people are responding. More and more groups are no longer defining themselves among Western Ideals; just the opposite in fact, groups are crediting their rising strength as a result of those things that distinguish themselves from Western Civilizations. We were raised believing in the universality of Western notions, because that had been the dominant weltanschauung of our parents and their parents, and so forth. That is changing, especially with East Asia powering up their industrial machinery and the Middle East experiencing a huge demographic growth.

He is right, people are not fighting among religious lines - well, not entirely. Lebanese Christians were as likely to support Hezbollah as were their Muslim counterparts. It has a basis in religion, as Stayne said, as religion is a powerful binding force of people. But that is an incredibly short sighted and painfully narrow minded way to view what really is the pangs of a civilization coming to terms with itself after decades of Soviet oppression.

Does it excuse their behavior? Not in the least. The Arab world is desperately in need of a(nother) Renaissance. But that won't happen until some sort of religious hierarchy is reestablished in Islam, and power to interpret the Qur'an is removed from the people who use it to inflame the hearts and minds of those people raised in Islamic institutions (be it religious schools or state schools - the difference is often minimal). Islamic groups act eerily similar to the political machines of the late 1800's in America.

And on that vein, the Islamic Resurgence (to borrow Huntington's term) bears a marked similarity to the Protestant Reformation. To simply brush this aside is tantamount to trying to argue the Protestant Reformation did not have any impact on European politics. Both addressed similar issues, chiefly the corruption and complacency of the previous institutions. Just like Lutheranism and Calvinism developed during the Protestant Reformation, Sunni and Shi'ite have developed during the Islamic Resurgence. To push your buttons a little more, a comparison can be (and has been) drawn between the monastic discipline demanded by John Calvin and the Ayatollah Khomeini. Both also appealed to a young, dynamic, middle class. It is not the older generation committing the violence seen, it's ours.

Should the Pope apologize? No, he made an intellectual argument, and was using that quote to express the fact that what he was talking about (Reason and Religion) is a timeless idea. Should the Muslim world have gotten upset? Darn skippy, they should have. The truth stings as much as anything else. Yes, the Crusades happened. Yes, Christians have a violent past. Yes, Christians are now (for the most part) no longer oppressed. But the Pope's statements said nothing to that effect, so to bring them in is patently missing the point of the Pope's speech entirely.

[MidnightStalker]

I believe the vast majority of Muslims living in industrialized and westernized nations are unsupportive of this violent extremism.

That makes up between 25% and 35% of the overall Muslim population. The other 65-75% live in North Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia.
Rofl this is how you get your numbers?

"Hmm lets see, 30% of Muslims live within Western culture, so they have to agree with our opinions, because no Western country can harbor a terrorist. The remaining 70% of Muslims live outside of the Western hemisphere, therefore they all must be violent because they do not practice Western culture! If you are from Northern Africa you committing Jihad against the West!!"

You need to step back from your TV and stop letting yourself be a tool of media who just spoonfeeds you image after image and story after story about extremism. It doesn't represent the reality.

[koruptid]

Just to play devil's advocate, how do you know what the reality is? It's easy to say the media distorts issues—that's obvious—but does that mean everything the media portrays is false? If so, where are you getting your "real" information? Do you live in North Africa or Saudi Arabia?

[PHISH]

Just to play devil's advocate, how do you know what the reality is? It's easy to say the media distorts issues—that's obvious—but does that mean everything the media portrays is false? If so, where are you getting your "real" information? Do you live in North Africa or Saudi Arabia?
Of course it doesn't mean that everything the media portrays is false, nor was that what I was trying to point out..just suggesting a healthy case of disillusionment-anyway I don't see the media claiming that 100% of the muslims in North Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia want to kill your families and are bent on jihad.

I mean..xero's viewpoint is pretty much as extreme and illogical as it gets. How can I say that's far from accurate? For one-you have to actively search for the other side of stories to get any relevant perspective, you aren't going to be handfed reports that talk of normal reactions- the more extreme the more newsworthy. Beyond news, since you don't live there you have to draw on other things, like friends that live in these areas you can get personal accounts from, shit I work with a bunch of people from malaysia, many of them muslims (part of xero's apparent axis of muslim evil), another doing missions in north africa who keeps a regular blog and I keep in contact with, and a few friends from Saudi Arabia, this isn't to say what they say I take verbatim, but people that live in these places grant some healthy perspective and cynicism..
The rest is sort of redundant..I mean draw on general experiences, meeting all sorts of different people which you hold perceptions about, travelling around the world so you can realize a lot of your perceptions about other cultures and entire areas of the world are totally inaccurate, very little is different. The cross-section of the population that has an extreme viewpoint is pretty consistent throughout history in these situations..take away people's jobs and livlihood and those ideas become more appealing but...it's nowhere near that point for the vast majority. And Xero, the fact that you said that muslims in industrialized nations "probably are non-violent" and make up that 25-35% you're talking about then you go on to list a bunch of completely industrialized countries..saudi arabia, southeast asian countries..ie malaysia, just shows you should find out more about these countries and what the people are saying there.

Anyway where was the uproar by all the 100% jihadist muslims in this area with statements like this:?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3059365.stm

Grand Sheikh Mohammed Sayed Tantawi of the Al-Azhar mosque of Cairo - which is seen as the highest authority in Sunni Islam - said groups which carried out suicide bombings were the enemies of Islam.

Speaking at the conference in the Malaysian capital, Kuala Lumpur, Sheikh Tantawi said extremist Islamic groups had appropriated Islam and its notion of jihad, or holy struggle, for their own ends. ...
"Extremism is the enemy of Islam. Whereas, jihad is allowed in Islam to defend one's land, to help the oppressed. The difference between jihad in Islam and extremism is like the earth and the sky," Sheikh Tantawi said.

Book ban

Sheikh Tantawi said Muslim suicide attacks, including those against Israelis, were wrong and could not be justified.

His comments echoed those by Malaysian Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohammed who said, at the opening of the conference on Thursday, that salvation could not be achieved through the killing of innocent people.

Worried that Islam's image is being damaged by terrorists who have hijacked the religion for their own ends, delegates also considered banning books which fuel extremism. I'm guessing these stances haven't changed..

[SithDrummer]

Christians aren't oppressed, aren't having thier countries invaded, thier resources destroyed and/or exported, aren't having thier goverments overthrown and remaining in a state of constant political turmoil and civil war.
To be quite honest, the height of Christian violence and totalitarianism came about when Christianity was on top of the socio-political ladder. Consider the expected examples of the crusades and the inquisition, but also consider the exploration and colonization of the Americas. When Christians had the money and the power, that's when the crap hit the fan.

edit: also, thanks PHISH and Cyberdemon for links on moderate Muslims trying to keep their extremist counterparts in check.