Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Remarks by Pope Prompt Muslim Outrage
outfctrl
Member UncommonPosts: 3,619
"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,"
Soon after, this happens.
NABLUS, West Bank - Two West Bank Christian churches were hit by firebombs early Saturday, and a group claiming responsibility said it was protesting Pope Benedict XVI’s remarks about Islam.
Christian churches in the Middle East are vandalized, a Catholic nun in Africa is killed and Muslims have demanded that the pope convert to Islam – all because he read a quote from a medieval text that described Islam as "evil and inhuman."
The pope has issued an apology for even referencing the historic text, emphasized that those views are not his, but still many in the Islamic world are demanding blood.
A new group called "The sword of Islam" contacted reporters and said it had fired gunshots at a Christian church in the Middle East during a demonstration over the comments.
We want to make it clear that if the pope does not appear on TV and apologize for his comments, "we will blow up all of Gaza's churches," the group said in a report.
What kind of crap is that? These people are total wackos. The Pope was right and had the guts to say it.
Comments
At this point i think a lot of muslims toward the extreme side of things are just looking for excuses to kill people.
Tbh they all worship the same god, their god doesnt like killing so why do they hate eachother?
Funny thing is, that they hurt themselves more with this stupid behavior. Some of the them still live in the medieval ages.
you know how the muslim community in the middle east is. don't you dare to have any critism on their faith, or your dead. lots of viiolence.
They are living proof that whatever their religions is: It must be evil.
Islam isn't evil. but those people give Islam the image of some massive satanic cult.
Whenever they have violent protests, they should just napalm the crowd; these idiots are propagating more idiots by brainwashing their own children.
No, that's not a racist comment, since there are middle-eastern people that are Christians/Jews etc.
No, I'm not saying that real Muslims should be killed, but that those violent extremists (that aren't real Muslims) are the bane of modern society and that we'd be better off with them dead.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
Muslim #1: They called our religion evil! What should we do?
Muslim #2: Kill them of course!
Muslim #1: Duh! I should of thought of that. Killing them will definately prove them wrong!
How is it that these people are being taken seriously and everyone's acting like we're the bad guys?
member of imminst.org
I think this article pretty much sums it up for me. People here might know I'm christian. They've seen me defend my faith when I've felt some went too far with their slurs. But, the most passionate anti-christian should always have free reign to speak. That is, without fear of violence or stripping of civil liberties. However, if you look at the Middle east (regarding the Pope or the Danish Cartoon), there are real threats being made. Things like "You can't practice your free speech when the subject is us, or, you can expect violence!" Then, there's the demands for an apology, and/or conversion. I've seen a few comments here that if we dropped support for Israel, or removed ourselves from oil dependancy, the threat would go away. I don't think so. Seems to me that it goes way beyond those two issues.
Concerning Iran, I've seen people rationalize that since "The West" has nukes, who are we to judge? Can you imagine a proliferation of intercontinental nukes throughtout the mid-east? With the attitudes and actions we're seeing? Terrorism (sometimes just over words) based in these nations, and protected by a nuclear umbrella...I'd imagine a much more prolific and overt terroristic threat.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDdjNzM2ZjZkYzc3NWExYzk1YWVhY2FhMDc4YmJmM2I=
LAHORE, Pakistan - About 1,000 Muslim clerics and religious scholars
meeting Thursday in eastern Pakistan demanded the removal of Pope
Benedict XVI for making what they called "insulting remarks" against
Islam.
Benedict "should be removed from his position immediately
for encouraging war and fanning hostility between various faiths" and
"making insulting remarks" against Islam, said a joint statement issued
by the clerics and scholars at the end of their one-day convention.
The
"pope, and all infidels, should know that no Muslim, under any
circumstances, can tolerate an insult to the Prophet (Muhammad). ... If
the West does not change its stance regarding Islam, it will face
severe consequences," it said.
The meeting was organized by the
radical Islamic group Jamaat al-Dawat, which runs schools, colleges and
medical clinics. In April, Washington put the group on a list of
terrorist organizations for its alleged links with militants fighting
in the Indian part of Kashmir.
The meeting came after the pope
said Sunday he was "deeply sorry" about the reactions to his remarks
and that they did not reflect his own opinions.
He said Wednesday
that he has "deep respect" for Islam, but he did not offer an apology
that was demanded by some Muslim leaders offended by his remarks in
Germany last week.
The pope acknowledged that his remarks were
open to misinterpretation, but insisted he had not intended to endorse
a negative view of Islam.
In Germany, Benedict cited the words of
a Byzantine emperor who characterized some of the teachings of the
Prophet Muhammad as "evil and inhuman," particularly "his command to
spread by the sword the faith."
"This quote unfortunately lent
itself to be misunderstood," the pontiff said Wednesday. "In no way did
I wish to make my own the words of the medieval emperor. I wished to
explain that not religion and violence, but religion and reason go
together."
The clerics and religious scholars said they did not regard Benedict's latest comments as an apology.
"The pope has neither accepted his mistake, nor apologized for his words," it said.
The
statement also said jihad was not terrorism and that "Islam was not
propagated with the sword, but it became popular and was accepted by
the oppressed peoples of the world because of its universal values and
teachings."
"Jihad is waged to rid an area, state, or the world
of oppression, violence, cruelty, and terrorism, and bring peace and
relief to the people. History is full of incidents where Muslims waged
jihad to provide relief to people of many faiths, especially Jews and
Christians," it said.
Pakistan is the world's second most
populous country, and its people have held small, peaceful rallies
since the publication of pope's remarks about Islam.
Jihad is waged to rid an area, state, or the world
of oppression, violence, cruelty, and terrorism, and bring peace and
relief to the people. History is full of incidents where Muslims waged
jihad to provide relief to people of many faiths, especially Jews and
Christians........YEAH BY KILLING PEOPLE!!!!!
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
That was ONE demonstration in ONE city. I can't remember which.
Catholics/Christians NEVER got along with Islamics/Muslims.
It's like a war, they hate eachother with a passion. This is nothing new at all, you all should of known this.
Why do you think the Pope didn't actualy take back his words? He only appologized, but didn't take them back. You know damn well he ment every word. But the public demanded that he say "Sorry!"
The Islamic's outragged by what the Pope said that they will also destroy the western world. As in destroy Christianity and Catholics. Burn down the churches, take down America's goverment and make the international religion Islamic.
They also said that if you don't convert to Islamic, they will kill you with a sword.
Nice eh?
This reminds me of Hitler of course.
And you can be sure, that they WILL and ARE trying to do just that. Islamic is the fastest growing religion in the world, even though Christianity is the largest, but Islamic is catching up fast.
I don't doubt that there will be a "War of the Faiths" where it will be Christians/Catholics versus The Islamic and Muslims with the way things are going now.
What a nice thought eh?
Independant, Shinto, Lesbian, and Proud!
Maybe they should start in their own back yard then. Plenty of oppression, violence, cruelty, and terrorism there. Should keep 'em busy for quite awhile and away from the civilized world.
That was ONE demonstration in ONE city. I can't remember which.
Unless the exact same happened in 13000 other cities I don't see how it's a majority.
What's there to know? The most vocal and aggressive get attention. This isn't a new concept.
I mean is this a joke? Honestly, it's absolutely ironical.
"Fear not death; for the sooner we die, the longer shall we be immortal."
What DOESNT piss off the muslims?
Will there EVER be an incident that wont piss off the muslim world?
I find it ironic that mere words can upset them.
Hmm lets see....christians bombing a mosque?nope.
Christians and Lockerbie?nope.
Christians beheading people?nope.
Christians and suicide bombing?nope.
See a pattern here folks?
Want to ENJOY an mmo?
Dont start a guild and dont be a leader or volunteer to be coleader or captain.
Just play the damn game:)
The IRA was not comprised of Buddhists, in case you didn't know. ETA, Central American deathsquads, the Khmer Rouge ... look around, barbaric nastiness is part of the human condition around the world.
The firebombing of Dresden and the vaporization of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was accomplished by Christians.
So, you might want to get off the horse, it's looking a little tall for you.
The IRA was not comprised of Buddhists, in case you didn't know.
The firebombing of Dresden and the vaporization of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was accomplished by Christians.
So, you might want to get off the horse, it's looking a little tall for you.
Your analogy of world war 2 being christiant is invalid, we did not enter world war two for religious reasons...it's a completely separate issue.
And yes, the Muslims staging massive riots and protests and even killing people as a result of the Pope's comments is irony in its purest form...Rosie O Donnel recently stated that "Christian radicals are much more dangerous than Muslim radicals"
Do you see us trying to blow up her house now? of course not...not that I'm comparing Rosie O donnel's influence with that of the Pope, but it's the same thing on a smaller scale.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Your analogy of world war 2 being christiant is invalid, we did not enter world war two for religious reasons...it's a completely separate issue.
And yes, the Muslims staging massive riots and protests and even killing people as a result of the Pope's comments is irony in its purest form...Rosie O Donnel recently stated that "Christian radicals are much more dangerous than Muslim radicals"
Do you see us trying to blow up her house now? of course not...not that I'm comparing Rosie O donnel's influence with that of the Pope, but it's the same thing on a smaller scale.
Simply countering the preposterous notion that horrific atrocities and violence are somehow confined to one ethnic, religious, or ideological strain within our species. They're not. They're in our genes. Get enough poor, angry people together that feel they've been "done wrong" by another group, add an organizing elite, and watch the violence flow. The Muslim world has firebrand clerics as their organizing elite, just as Catholics once had the Inquisition. Doesn't mean all Muslims are Al Qaeda, any more than all Catholics were Inquisitors.
We riot for different reasons ... some of them far less defensible. Tell me about our rationality the next time some mob of yahoos sets fire to their own town when they win the Super Bowl. We're just not poor and angry enough to do it as often as people in Islamabad or Kabul. But it wasn't *that* long ago they were doing it in Watts and Newark.
Your analogy of world war 2 being christiant is invalid, we did not enter world war two for religious reasons...it's a completely separate issue.
And yes, the Muslims staging massive riots and protests and even killing people as a result of the Pope's comments is irony in its purest form...Rosie O Donnel recently stated that "Christian radicals are much more dangerous than Muslim radicals"
Do you see us trying to blow up her house now? of course not...not that I'm comparing Rosie O donnel's influence with that of the Pope, but it's the same thing on a smaller scale.
Simply countering the preposterous notion that horrific atrocities and violence are somehow confined to one ethnic, religious, or ideological strain within our species. They're not. They're in our genes. Get enough poor, angry people together that feel they've been "done wrong" by another group, add an organizing elite, and watch the violence flow. The Muslim world has firebrand clerics as their organizing elite, just as Catholics once had the Inquisition. Doesn't mean all Muslims are Al Qaeda, any more than all Catholics were Inquisitors.
We riot for different reasons ... some of them far less defensible. Tell me about our rationality the next time some mob of yahoos sets fire to their own town when they win the Super Bowl. We're just not poor and angry enough to do it as often as people in Islamabad or Kabul. But it wasn't *that* long ago they were doing it in Watts and Newark.
I don't consider it a preposterous notion, how many other ethnicities and religions do you see commiting such attrocities on such a massive scale? Of course I will agree that Christians have their own share of wrong doings, but they pale in comparison to that of the Muslim radicals.
I agree to a certain extent with your point...but I think that maybe you are comparing apples to oranges here, you compare medieval time catholicism to modern Islam, you compare modern day, with something that happened centuries ago.
Super Bowl riots...as a HUGE football fan, I'm not sure where to go with this one, I think that Soccer riots are more commonplace than any kind of riot associated with football, or even basketball. Anyway, let's go with Superbowl since it's what you chose to use...Super Bowl riots are not a result of a hypocritical moral outrage about something, it's about a town being either extremely angry that their team lost, or happy that their team won. Does it REALLY make sense? Of course not, there is no excuse for that kind of behaviour. But comparing a super bowl riot to what the Muslims are doing right now is a bit outrageous...super bowl riots don't last for weeks, they last for hours.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
I don't consider it a preposterous notion, how many other
ethnicities and religions do you see commiting such attrocities on such
a massive scale? Of course I will agree that Christians have their own
share of wrong doings, but they pale in comparison to that of the
Muslim radicals.
I agree to a certain extent with your point...but I think that maybe
you are comparing apples to oranges here, you compare medieval time
catholicism to modern Islam, you compare modern day, with something
that happened centuries ago.
Rwanda ... Cambodia ... Central America.
All modern ... none of the atrocities committed by Muslims. How many
examples do you need? The Rape of Nanjing? Yugoslav 'ethnic
cleansing'? Stalin's purges?
In comparison, modern Islamic violence 'pales in comparison' to the truly great crimes of the 20th and 21st centuries.
I hasten to add .... it's not a competition, Islamic world.
I don't consider it a preposterous notion, how many other ethnicities and religions do you see commiting such attrocities on such a massive scale? Of course I will agree that Christians have their own share of wrong doings, but they pale in comparison to that of the Muslim radicals.
I agree to a certain extent with your point...but I think that maybe you are comparing apples to oranges here, you compare medieval time catholicism to modern Islam, you compare modern day, with something that happened centuries ago.
Rwanda ... Cambodia ... Central America.
All modern ... none of the atrocities committed by Muslims. How many examples do you need? The Rape of Nanjing? Yugoslav 'ethnic cleansing'? Stalin's purges?
In comparison, modern Islamic violence 'pales in comparison' to the truly great crimes of the 20th and 21st centuries.
I hasten to add .... it's not a competition, Islamic world.
Rwanda-The hutu are Catholic, yes...I'm unfamiliar with what exactly they were fighting over, so I can't really comment on this one.
Cambodia- These fights were land disputes, not massive killing based on differing religions.
Central America- Made up, again, mostly of Catholics.
Now, you made some valid points but using Stalin???
Using a radical like Stalin is hardly valid, Stalin killed millions, not because of their religion, but because he was paranoid that they would attempt to userp his political power....it had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with maintaining power.
Nor was Stalin's campaign endorced by anybody but those in his own cabinet, and he even killed some of them due to paranoia...sorry but stating that Stalin was a Christian who killed millions is like saying that Hitler was a guy with a weird mustache that killed millions...is it true? yeah, is it inconsiquential to what he actually did? yes.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Rwanda-The hutu are Catholic, yes...I'm unfamiliar with what exactly they were fighting over, so I can't really comment on this one.
Cambodia- These fights were land disputes, not massive killing based on differing religions.
Central America- Made up, again, mostly of Catholics.
Now, you made some valid points but using Stalin???
Using a radical like Stalin is hardly valid, Stalin killed millions, not because of their religion, but because he was paranoid that they would attempt to userp his political power....it had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with maintaining power.
Nor was Stalin's campaign endorced by anybody but those in his own cabinet, and he even killed some of them due to paranoia...sorry but stating that Stalin was a Christian who killed millions is like saying that Hitler was a guy with a weird mustache that killed millions...is it true? yeah, is it inconsiquential to what he actually did? yes.
I never inferred that any of those groups were Christian, certainly not the Khmer Rouge or Stalin ... I was emphasizing that the human capacity for atrocity is independent of religion. Religion is just an organizing force that can be used (or misused, if you prefer) to catalyze atrocity in a population. Religion provides educated, motivated, ideological leaders, and that's all it takes to set off a mob in the right conditions, no matter what period of history we're talking about.
Stalin used a different ideological organizing principle to trigger his atrocities. So did Mao. My point is that in the right circumstances, any population will commit, endorse, or passively accept atrocities, and it is sheer cultural arrogance to claim that any ethnicity or religion is "more prone" to it. Germans, Americans, Russians, Japanese, Chinese, Britons .... they've all commited atrocity in the name of religion or ideology or commerce or empire. There is nobody on the planet who can cast the first stone in this glass house.
They said the same thing on Daily Show recently.
They're attempting to prove they aren't violent by shooting at and blowing up some Churches. How effective is that?
We barely remember who or what came before this precious moment;
We are choosing to be here right now -Tool, Parabola