-comment deleted-

Please review Pardon My English Comment Policy or contact author for further information.

Thanks to mattk and Patrick. You have both saved me the time I might have spent reading either of those odious books.

In all seriousity, it's funny how it's the fundamentalist Christians (in all fairness, I have no idea whether Patrick qualifies) in this country who object most strenuously to Islam, when they are far more similar to them than let's say your average secular relativist. If anyone should hate Islam, it would be your typical Western atheist/agnostic.

However, we nonbelievers have long ago learned to live peacefully among fervent zealots. We can only look upon attempts by one group of fundamentalists to discredit another with some amusement. To us, you're all nutty, and the differences between you have more to do with who's on top than any specific verse or sunna.

In other words, you both raise salient points. Down with the fundamentalists!

Ha @ -comment deleted-

Some Fella, you seem pretty confident that you speak for a large group of people. I'm an atheist and while I don't consider any religion reasonable to believe in, I nevertheless see a much bigger difference between Christians and Muslims that "who's on top", whatever that means. For one, if I went to a Christian country I wouldn't be jailed as a spy and tortured or killed. Second, since my school is in DC, I have had to think about emergency plans not in case of Christian fundamentalist murderers, but Muslim ones.

>>I have had to think about emergency plans not in case of Christian fundamentalist murderers, but Muslim ones.

What if you went to school next to an abortion clinic or a planned parenthood?

I can only imagine that matt followed his trend and added the same old tired list of things in the OLD TESTAMENT of the Bible that ARE NOT FOLLOWED to counteract the things in the Qu'ran that ARE FOLLOWED.

When was the last time Christians were:

: 1) Slaughtering sons for the guilt of their fathers 2) Cursing those that do the Lord's work remissly or those that holds back his sword from blood. 3) Slaughtering those that reject the verdict of a judge or priest. 4) Slaughtering those that don't enter a covenant with the Lord......although this is clearly part of a story of something that may or may not have happened in the past. 5) Slaughtering and burning entire towns, never to be rebuilt again. 6) Killing those that don't abide by the rules of the Sabbath day. 7) Killing those that curse their mother or father. 8) Men selling their daughters as slaves.

Those are YOUR list matt....when was the last time they were followed? Oh yeah....they aren't. I can show you EXACTLY the passages that ARE being followed in the Qu'ran that need to be reformed in Islam before it can live peacefully in a civil world with others, in disagreement with others, but peaceful about it.

Dumbass...Planned Parenthood and "abortion clinic" are redundant. PP is about the removal of parenthood, not the planning FOR it. It's a misnomer to make them SOUND better for the People...just like dilation and excision.

>>Those are YOUR list matt....when was the last time they were followed? Oh yeah....they aren't.

The same is true with Patrick's list. Sure, there are exceptions in each group - nutcases - but they are not representitive of the religion as a whole.

The same is NOT true for Patrick's list. Open your eyes and see that everything he points out is occurring right now, in THIS century....and everything YOU point out hasn't occurred for hundreds of years. Unless you care to point out all those Christians selling their daughters into slavery. Didn't think so.

THEN, open your eyes and see that Patrick goes out of his way to say EXACTLY what you just did. THEY are not representative of Islam as a hole. ...but they ARE following the strict tenets of the good books of that religion. How many times does he need to say it?

Stick your head back in the sand....your false analogy gets you nowhere.

>>THEN, open your eyes and see that Patrick goes out of his way to say EXACTLY what you just did.

Absolutely false. He does little, if anything, to separate the terrorists from the religion. At best, he will occasionally contradict himself on the topic.

Take his first line -

"Al-Qaeda in Iraq (and elsewhere) is not an extremist or fringe group who have hijacked Islam."

Direct, isn't it? If they're not extremist or fringe, what remains? Mainstream.

"It is true that al-Qaeda, in addition to hundreds of other jihad groups and hundreds of thousands of mujahideen who are organized only under the black banner of jihad, do not represent all Muslims. Only an ignorant reactionary will assume that all Muslims automatically approve of the vicious Islamic terror being carried out by their brethren all over the world."

Okay, so not ALL muslims approve of terrorism. However, he JUST stated that terrorists represent mainstream islam. Is he telling me that a minority of muslims support terrorism?

>>al-Qaeda is only a name which embodies the orthodox ideology of violent jihad against the infidel, which mainstream Islam has yet to categorically renounce.

once again, mainstream islam supports terrorism.

>>This is nothing more than transferring the core principles of Islam from their dogmatic theory in the Quran and sunna into actions which fulfill their stated purpose in reality.

If islam is based on the quran as christianity is based on the bible, then all faithful muslims support terrorism as it is based on the following quotes.

>>This is how it shall be until reform-minded Muslims are given complete support and security from the infidel. Until then, they are powerless to effect change in their unreformed, medieval faith.

By infidel does he mean the US? He certainly isn't clear about it. He goes on to brand the whole religion as medieval and needing reform which is certainly insulting to the vast majority of muslims. Do the "reformed" muslims believe they practicing some bend on a flawed religion? Doubt it. Bet they think they practice the real thing.

---

What patrick is doing is no different than someone studying christianity and concluding that it is about pedophilia, gay bashing, and the oppression of women.

Mattk, you have not illustrated that in any way, shape or form.

It is not enough merely to say it. All you've done here is repeat everything he allready wrote...

Do you have any compelling evidence to back up your argument? Or a logical progression that leads to your conclusions (ie. an actual argument rather then a statement of personal opinion)?

MJohnson - perhaps if you read my posts before commenting on them, you will have a better understanding of what i am saying.

i attempted to break down the post to make sure i was properly understanding it. do you agree with how i interpreted it?

Simply because you ignore the evidence i put forth doesn't make it invalid. Patrick sites Koran passages that encourage violence but the same can be found in the bible. While terrorists use islam as an excuse for violence, christianity has been an excuse for violence again and again. Mainstream muslims don't support terrorism just like mainstream christians don't support terrorism. (violence against doctors that perform abortions is terrorism)

Oh sweet. Now patrick can delete my posts. I copy my bible posts because he's repeating his articles. Can I delete his articles?

Direct, isn't it? If they're not extremist or fringe, what remains? Mainstream.

No...what remains is a varying spectrum of supporters of terrorism that AREN'T members of terrorist organizations, those that have no clue that their mandatory charitable contributions go to terrorist organizations....and yes, muslims that don't follow the tenets of their good book that we can call "reformed" and want to live in a civil society with different peoples.

Nice small-world yoiu live in. Hell, I'm not an "extremist or a member of a "fringe group", yet dinks like you wouldn't put me in the "mainstream" either. Small world thinking gets you nowhere.

Okay, so not ALL muslims approve of terrorism. However, he JUST stated that terrorists represent mainstream islam. Is he telling me that a minority of muslims support terrorism?

Actually, he did NOT state that...that was your translation. Nice UY/Russ tactic.

once again, mainstream islam supports terrorism.

Once again...following your incorrect translation. Guess you clearly missed the word "ORTHODOX"...consult a dictionary.

If islam is based on the quran as christianity is based on the bible, then all faithful muslims support terrorism as it is based on the following quotes.

If by "faithful, you mean they follow all the tenets of the Qu'ran verbatim, then yes. BUT that's talking about taking the Qu'ran and the sunna and taking the words verbatim and putting them into actions. BUT, that's not what the quote you attempted to use said anyway...yet another translation.

By infidel does he mean the US?

No, he means the NON-muslim. The "rest of us"...the "non-believer" as spoken about in the Qu'ran and sunna. Try educating yourself before you open your brain some more.

He goes on to brand the whole religion as medieval and needing reform which is certainly insulting to the vast majority of muslims.

Yes, Islam is medieval, in need of reform to live peacefully in a civil world. Care to see some woman circumcising? Some stonings to death for adultery? Some "honor killings"? AND I don't give a shit who is insulted or offended by the truth. Call a waaaaambulance.

Do the "reformed" muslims believe they practicing some bend on a flawed religion?

Let's try to stick with talking about the NON-reformed muslim's actoins shall we? What you THINK they think isn't really relevant. I know for a fact that the "reformed" muslim is not following the tenets as strictly set up by the Qu'ran. At least, that's the impression that's given. AND I know that the non-reformed muslim IS following the strict tenets set forth in the Qu'ran to varying degrees, and THAT's a fact.

Where are all those Christians selling their daughters into slavery again?

Mattk, I read it. This is precisely what I mean.

"Simply because you ignore the evidence i put forth doesn't make it invalid. Patrick sites Koran passages that encourage violence but the same can be found in the bible."

That's not evidence.

It's completely non-sequitar. Unrelated. Irrelevant. What you can or cannot find in the bible does not tell us anything about Islam.

It is perhaps, a useful illustration to support an argument, but not an argument in and of itself. It is entirely POSSIBLE that Christianity can be a peaceful religion that CAN be distorted to be violent and Islam be violent at the same time. I'm not saying that is the case, merely that it is possible. What you've said in no way demonstrates anything contrary.

What you've presented, Mattk, is a hypothesis. A hypothesis that Islam is being distorted as Christianity has shown itself in the past to have been distorted.

That is a valid hypothesis, but a thesis, not a theory.

You state your hypothesis again and again and again, but a hypothesis is nothing but a guess that is used as a starting point. But you are using it as a finishing point. You present no tests of this, no examination, nothing but repitition of a guess.

>>No...what remains is a varying spectrum of supporters of terrorism that AREN'T members of terrorist organizations,

You're simply off base here. He was talking about AL-QAEDA and ISLAM. Where does he mention these non-organisation-member supporters of islam? NOWHERE.

>>and yes, muslims that don't follow the tenets of their good book that we can call "reformed" and want to live in a civil society with different peoples.

Do they call THEMSELVES reform? I highly doubt that any muslim that isn't a supporter of terrorism considers terrorists to be orthodox.

>>Actually, he did NOT state that

He did. Maybe he didn't mean it. Maybe you understand what he is trying to say and not what he says.

>>No, he means the NON-muslim. The "rest of us"...the "non-believer" as spoken about in the Qu'ran and sunna. Try educating yourself before you open your brain some more.

I know what infidel means. The statement was too vague to have meaning. Even considering the wider meaning of infidels in this context the declaration still doesn't make sense.

>>Yes, Islam is medieval

No. You're not separating the religion from other elements in the culture. Are the millions of muslims in the US part of a medieval religion?

>>What you THINK they think isn't really relevant.

What they think of themselves matters immensely. It is once we have contact with them and need to work with them to eliminate militant extremists.

>>You state your hypothesis again and again and again...

...and how is that different from what Patrick is doing?

Patrick sites Koran passages that encourage violence but the same can be found in the bible.

Yes...and they're not followed because Christianity has reformed.

While terrorists use islam as an excuse for violence

No...terrorists use the policies of the West as an "excuse" for the violence that their stirct interpretation of the Qu'ran TELLS them to foister upon non-believers (the "reason").

christianity has been an excuse for violence again and again.

Yes.....in the past. Come into this century.

Mainstream muslims don't support terrorism

There's that nice ambiguous word "mainstream" again. How about going for "reformed"? PLUS, you're ignoring the fact that it's not just terrorism that's wrong with modern day Islam. There's also the horrific behaviors laid out in the Qu'ran that are practiced in muslim countries that what you call the "mainstream" muslim DOES support and practice. Things that need to be reformed OUT of the religion. Horrific behaviors that don't exist in a civil world....yet DO exist in many countries and are practiced by hundreds of millions. I'd call that pretty "accepting".

When was the last time ANY of those things you love to quote form the Old Testament happened again? You quote 'em for some point that you THINK you're making, but it immediately becomes apples-oranges because they do not occur any more. What is it that you have against Christians?

Patrick has what I would call a fully formed theory going.

He states the way he thinks it is, how he came to the conclusion, and then lists examples and shows how the examples support his theory, and provides a statement he feels will explain any further example or test.

That doesn't mean he's RIGHT, but he's got a complete argument, examples, sources and all, not just a statement of his personal opinion.

>>There's that nice ambiguous word "mainstream" again. How about going for "reformed"?

??

Sarge is all semantics no substance.

Mainstream muslims don't support terrorism just like mainstream christians don't support terrorism.

Then kindly explain why hordes of mainstream Muslims were dancing in the streets of Gaza and the West Bank on September 11th, 2001.

What is it that you have against Christians?

As a liberal, he sees no reason to like them. Liberals only like people who are oppressed, have a good sob story, or are not white...

>>Then kindly explain why hordes of mainstream Muslims were dancing in the streets of Gaza and the West Bank on September 11th, 2001.

Explain why hordes werent.

...and after 3 years, UY STILL has nothing to say. Need another lesson in logic dipfuck? When someone makes a claim about a large group of people it's completely irrelevant, illogical, and asinine to point to an entirely DIFFERENT group of people in order to refute the point that was made.....because it does NOTHING to tend to that point. The point still exists. Logical fallacies is all you have...but we're used to your complete lack of logic anyway. Learn about your mayor yet?

Still waiting for that list of Christians that're:

: 1) Slaughtering sons for the guilt of their fathers 2) Cursing those that do the Lord's work remissly or those that holds back his sword from blood. 3) Slaughtering those that reject the verdict of a judge or priest. 4) Slaughtering those that don't enter a covenant with the Lord......although this is clearly part of a story of something that may or may not have happened in the past. 5) Slaughtering and burning entire towns, never to be rebuilt again. 6) Killing those that don't abide by the rules of the Sabbath day. 7) Killing those that curse their mother or father. 8) Men selling their daughters as slaves.

Its completely illogical to point out that SOME of a group of people numbering around a billion did something.

Eat shit Sarge if thats really all you got.

Its completely illogical to point out that SOME of a group of people numbering around a billion did something.

Take a logic course before you attempt logical discourse. Everyone knows you know nothing of logic. Yep, pathetic child doesn't like it when he's shown how much of an ass he is. "Eat shit....blah, blah..." Is THAT all you got? Still trying to learn about your own mayor?

Sarge really does got nothing but anger irrationality, bad logic and hate.

Sarge really does got nothing but anger irrationality, bad logic and hate.

Seeing as it's coming from UY, take everything he's said and just go for the opposite to describe "Sarge" and then apply all those lies to UY. You're projecting again UY.

Welcome to the latest UY circle-jerk of nothingness.

So anyway I point out something.

You say its crap.

I make another fine point.

You say its crap.

And yet its somehow my problem?

Good good. Lie and then lie some more. Make your first point in 3 years. Go ahead...try.

You say its crap.

No...I PROVE it's crap.

I make another fine point.

You've had to actually make ONE point in order to have "another" point and nothing you've ever added in 3 years has been "fine".

You say its crap.

No, I PROVE it's crap.

And yet its somehow my problem?

Yes, you are incapable of making a point, making an argument, or saying ANYTHING logical and everyone here and on mutiple other sites knows it. You're a pathetic troll, nothing more.

Yes, you are incapable of making a point, making an argument, or saying ANYTHING logical and everyone here and on mutiple other sites knows it. You're a pathetic troll, nothing more.

Forgot to say...."and all THAT has nothing to do with ME."

Sarge you proved jackshit.

Funny world you live in.

I find this to be rather disturbing.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15206

Sorry, I stopped listening to "because I said so" bullshit before my teens and am certainly not gonna listen to it coming from a 21 yo punk with a 5 yo mentality.

No MJ. None of that happened. Darfur never happened. Muslims don't follow ANY of the atrocious tenets of the Qu'ran in any manner.

Didn't you get the memo? Christians are the problem.

>>Sarge really does got nothing but anger irrationality, bad logic and hate.

Megalomaniacal projection again?

UY really does "got nothing" but, well....er......nothing.

Didn't think you really had something to say. 3 years and counting.....

Yawn...

Way to suck at life Sarge.

Lemme know when you've actually DONE something in life. Didn't think you actually had something to say after 3 years of the same.....nothing. I hear the DU bell ringing...run along child.

Another cut n paste job Sarge?

Another post that says nothing, UY?

Dunno, I said something how it must be nice not to type since all you do is cut n paste.

Sorry, I only cut/paste the answer to matt's cut/paste anti-Bible tirade. Thus, you are a LIAR, once again.

Didn't think you had anything to say...3 years and counting...NOTHING form you. Pathetic troll is all you are.

>>...NOTHING form you. Pathetic troll is all you are.

Terrible spelling and Yodaish grammar.

You have no credibility to call other people on their spelling and grammar. How about looking at the fact that, while being a stupid fuck, what you just posted as a "sentence" was merely a phrase? Talk about the sheer lack of grammar.

>>was merely a phrase?

And?

AND...it shows you to be the absolute stupid fuck you are when you call other people on their grammar and spelling to hide the fact that you have nothing to say. Or are you just another ordinary hypocrite?

And?