tim r- no one cares

By the way, why is it racist to point out, as Horowitz does, that the OVERWHELMING majority of terrorist attacks against this country in the last 30 years have been committed by Muslims and some Muslims use the Quran as justification for their malevolent acts? Its not racist, its realist!

Islamofascism (or Islamism) is the main threat facing modern civilization and ignorance about this threat is astounding. We hope that this event becomes regular and reaches every campus.

A great many Westerners do not see the clear distinction between Islam and Islamism (Islamofascism). They need to understand that the difference between Islam and Islamism (Islamofascism) is the same as the difference between Christianity and Christian Identity Movement (White Supremacy Movement).

Original post

Whenever someone asks why I am locked in this cage, the owner replies I am very violent and he needs to be protected from me.

Tim, do you think I have been treated fairly? I think you do. In fact, you may very well wish you were one of those guards.

Your point about Saudi Arabia is a valid one. It is a total disgrace that my government supports that disgusting regime. I am ashamed of it. Almost all the hijackers on 9/11/01 were Saudi. Not only President Bush, but Clinton and all the ones who came before him have called the Saudis our “friends” for the sake of oil and it is a national disgrace. If I had my way, we would cut off all diplomatic relations and economic ties with them.

Your point about Israel I disagree with. Israel was founded on May 14th 1948 after the United Nations agreed to a two state plan, one arab one jewish. The Jews accepted the deal. The Arabs did not, and the very next day, May 15th 1948, all the Arabs in the area attacked Israel. They have not stopped ever since.

As to the alleged “occupation” it is an historical fact the the entire area known as the “west bank” was controled by Jordan until June of 1967. At that time Jordan attacked Israel and Israel siezed control of the land while in the course of DEFENDING herself. The same goes for the Gaza Strip which was controled by Eygpt. Why should a nation, any nation, that has been attacked time and time again since its birth, have to give back land it took while in the course of defending itself? Please explain that one to me.

Also, even if the Palestinians have been mistreated, and I will cede the point that they have, that is no excuse for the wanton violence of Muslims all over the world. What about the people of Tibet? They have been oppressed by the Chinese government for many years but are they killing people, hijacking planes and calling for “holy war?” The Dali Lama, a great man, is working for his people but in a peaceful way. Sadly, many Muslims do not want peace for the believe in war.

In closing, I am happy that you and your Muslim brothers live peacefully in southern India and I wish that could be the case all over the world. I really hope the modern and moderate Muslims will stand up for peace. But I submit to you that the real issue is not about occupation but religion. The Muslim radicals believe in violence based on religion and their religion is at the heart of it all. Islam, as it is currently practiced by most Muslims, is not a peaceful relgion.

The Jewish, Christian and Islamic texts all build upon the same traditions, philosophies and mythologies shaped and reshaped from the old Egypt, Sumerian, Babylonian, Hittite, Persian, Assyrian texts and traditions etc.

Christianity was spread in Europe around the same time as Islam in the Middle-East and north-Africa. Both were spread with terrible violence and were used as tools to create political unity in vast empires.

I see also much is being made of the battle at Poitiers of Charles Martel (I saw a book by some neocon “historian” which may explain the sudden interest in this particular episode), yet there is nothing to be found about any such battle at all in the Moor sources and Al-Walid ibn Abd al-Malik didn’t even want Europe out of fear that it would strategically weaken the entire empire. Later Martel’s grandson Charlemagne would befriend Harun al Raschid, the fifth Abbasid caliph and form a political front with him against the emir of Cordoba. Charlemagne wasn’t exactly a hero of religious freedom, converted people to christianity by sword, torture and your occasional demonstrative beheadings. As an illiterate and not too much subjected to religious zeal himself, however he very well knew how to use religion as an instrument to create the necessary political unity in his empire, as many before him and after him.

Precisely this aim: political (and cultural) unity was the motivation for the (mostly) invented history in the aggregation (copies of copies) of Yahwist texts of the different groups, later to form a distinct group of “Israelites,” historically merely a footnote in the utterly complex history of the peoples of (trade hub) Palestine.

I don’t think the alledged founder of christianity (which didn’t start as a single group or doctrine anyway) “Jesus Christ” has been a historical person or interacted in any way with real existing persons on Earth, that might seem clear enough for many, as goes for “Abraham,”"Moses,” “David” and a number of those biblical figures, but I’m gravitating to the position that the same goes for the historicity of “Mohammed” too.

Well anyway, the only the thing I know absolutely for certain, beyond any shadow of doubt is that this discussion will outlast my existence. And who knows, maybe that would be the most advisable position to take in these matters.

“The verses I cited do not refer to past battles. They are present exhortations to violence.” The Quran is God speaking to Muhammad in the 7th century, about what was taking place then. You know that, right?

“Between 622 and 732 the Islamic Fascists of those days spread your religion through war and violence and forced conversions…. They took over much of the world….” Not sure what you mean by “your religion” but you just need to listen to what you’re saying. To forcibly convert large portions of the world to a new religion in the course of a century is an impossible feat, especially for a small primitive army. You’re misreading history.

“Yes, Christianity was violent in the past. But Christians have progressed a great deal.” You need to read more of this website.

“I defy you to read the New Testment and cite for me at least 3 things Jesus said in which he called for violence or which was racist or sexist or homophobic?” Matthew 10:34, Mark 7:10, Luke 12:47. If the verses are taken out of context, as you have done with the Quran.

Anyhow, thanks for engaging in dialogue here rather than violence. That’s how progress is made.

Sura 2:216, 3:56, 3:151, 4:89, 5:33, 8:12, 9:5, 9:30

This is just a small sample of all the violent and hateful things you can find in the Quran. If you want to see more just read it for yourself!