Rationalization

[CSM]

So now it is also ok to kill innocent Muslims...nothing should stand in the way of jihad!

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/05/18/iraq.main/index.html

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A chilling, rambling audio file thought to be from the most-wanted man in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, says religious doctrine justifies the killing of innocent Muslims by insurgents.

The message was posted on several Islamist Web sites Wednesday, the same day a senior U.S. military official said the Jordanian-born leader of al Qaeda in Iraq ordered the recent wave of car bombings.

CNN has been unable to confirm that the voice is that of al-Zarqawi. The tape introduces the speaker as al-Zarqawi, but the speaker does not identify himself.

The voice says in Arabic: "The shedding of Muslim blood ... is allowed in order to avoid the greater evil of disrupting jihad."

The voice says the protection of religion "is more important than protecting lives, honor or wealth."

"God knows that we were careful not to kill Muslims, and we have called off many operations in the past to avoid losses ... but we cannot kill infidels without killing some Muslims. It is unavoidable," he adds.

The speaker defends suicide attacks, saying, "killing of infidels by any method including martyrdom operations has been sanctified by many scholars even if it meant killing innocent Muslims."

"This legality has been agreed upon ... so as not to disrupt jihad," or "holy war," the recording says.

 

[Annie]

So now it is also ok to kill innocent Muslims...nothing should stand in the way of jihad!

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/05/18/iraq.main/index.html

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A chilling, rambling audio file thought to be from the most-wanted man in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, says religious doctrine justifies the killing of innocent Muslims by insurgents.

The message was posted on several Islamist Web sites Wednesday, the same day a senior U.S. military official said the Jordanian-born leader of al Qaeda in Iraq ordered the recent wave of car bombings.

CNN has been unable to confirm that the voice is that of al-Zarqawi. The tape introduces the speaker as al-Zarqawi, but the speaker does not identify himself.

The voice says in Arabic: "The shedding of Muslim blood ... is allowed in order to avoid the greater evil of disrupting jihad."

The voice says the protection of religion "is more important than protecting lives, honor or wealth."

"God knows that we were careful not to kill Muslims, and we have called off many operations in the past to avoid losses ... but we cannot kill infidels without killing some Muslims. It is unavoidable," he adds.

The speaker defends suicide attacks, saying, "killing of infidels by any method including martyrdom operations has been sanctified by many scholars even if it meant killing innocent Muslims."

"This legality has been agreed upon ... so as not to disrupt jihad," or "holy war," the recording says.

I think that's why we took the fight to Iraq, better there with flypaper, than Manhattan.

 

[CSM]

If there is any doubt in anyone's mind regarding the intent of the militant Muslim, they merely need to listen to what they say....the fact that the "moderate" Muslim does nothing to refute the militant Muslim speaks volumes as well....I wonder if there is sucha thing as a moderate Muslim.

I keep hearing people talk about Islam as the religion of peace. It's actions show us it is really the religion of terror. The fact that other religions have used terror in the past is not justification for ANY religion to sanction terrorism today.

 

[no1tovote4]

If there is any doubt in anyone's mind regarding the intent of the militant Muslim, they merely need to listen to what they say....the fact that the "moderate" Muslim does nothing to refute the militant Muslim speaks volumes as well....I wonder if there is sucha thing as a moderate Muslim.

I keep hearing people talk about Islam as the religion of peace. It's actions show us it is really the religion of terror. The fact that other religions have used terror in the past is not justification for ANY religion to sanction terrorism today.

Currently Islam is going through a modern day Inquisition, where the most fundamentalist "leaders" have taken over and the regular person who is Muslim stands in fear of the reaction of the few who "lead". If they speak out they are branded as a bad Muslim and a target is placed on them as much as the US Citizen, the only difference is they are within reach and often are taken as a target of opportunity.

The one who would turn in a terrorist knows that it is likely that their entire family will suffer for their action...

Each time one person stands up and they are actually protected we have won a huge, but quiet, victory.

 

[CSM]

Currently Islam is going through a modern day Inquisition, where the most fundamentalist "leaders" have taken over and the regular person who is Muslim stands in fear of the reaction of the few who "lead". If they speak out they are branded as a bad Muslim and a target is placed on them as much as the US Citizen, the only difference is they are within reach and often are taken as a target of opportunity.

The one who would turn in a terrorist knows that it is likely that their entire family will suffer for their action...

Each time one person stands up and they are actually protected we have won a huge, but quiet, victory.

Can't argue that; however, there are Muslim leaders outside the reach and range of the militants though could speak up without fear of physical reprisal yet they are silent.

 

[CSM]

They need to take back their religion if they intend on saving face.

not mention their ass! Obviously, the terrorists are willing to blow them away for the sake of jihad....life is very very cheap in their eyes.

 

[Said1]

Can't argue that; however, there are Muslim leaders outside the reach and range of the militants though could speak up without fear of physical reprisal yet they are silent.

True, and I think some have. Traditionally, they have used Mosques to call for this and that, what they are preaching to their followers will be what produces results, probably moreso than public pleas for peace.

 

[freeandfun1]

I was listening to Michael Savage yesterday and he had a caller that got out of prison in 2003 after serving 16-1/2 years. He "found God" while in prison and he seemed very sincere and calm. Anyway, he was telling how in the prisons, the liberals are pushing to ban Christian services and even banning Bibles. Yet the Muslims are ENCOURAGED to practice their religion and they are afforded special treatment such as no pork being allowed AT ALL on the menu. He said he was amazed when he got out how much the US had changed and how strange it seems.

He was in prison (so he says and I do believe him, if you heard him, you probably would too) because he walked in on a man raping a 12 year old girl and he picked up a baseball bat and beat the guy to death. He was convicted of involuntary manslaughter.

 

[Said1]

I was listening to Michael Savage yesterday and he had a caller that got out of prison in 2003 after serving 16-1/2 years. He "found God" while in prison and he seemed very sincere and calm. Anyway, he was telling how in the prisons, the liberals are pushing to ban Christian services and even banning Bibles. Yet the Muslims are ENCOURAGED to practice their religion and they are afforded special treatment such as no pork being allowed AT ALL on the menu. He said he was amazed when he got out how much the US had changed and how strange it seems.

He was in prison (so he says and I do believe him, if you heard him, you probably would too) because he walked in on a man raping a 12 year old girl and he picked up a baseball bat and beat the guy to death. He was convicted of involuntary manslaughter.

Did he explain the justification for changes to prison menus etc?

 

[archangel]

I was listening to Michael Savage yesterday and he had a caller that got out of prison in 2003 after serving 16-1/2 years. He "found God" while in prison and he seemed very sincere and calm. Anyway, he was telling how in the prisons, the liberals are pushing to ban Christian services and even banning Bibles. Yet the Muslims are ENCOURAGED to practice their religion and they are afforded special treatment such as no pork being allowed AT ALL on the menu. He said he was amazed when he got out how much the US had changed and how strange it seems.

He was in prison (so he says and I do believe him, if you heard him, you probably would too) because he walked in on a man raping a 12 year old girl and he picked up a baseball bat and beat the guy to death. He was convicted of involuntary manslaughter.

I want to believe the guy...because if it were true I would have done the same...given the circumstances...however I was a little concerned about the 16 1/2 years imposed by "Involuntary manslaughter" this amount of time would be more in line with "Voluntary manslaughter" If he had a clean record the most he would have probably been given for "Involuntary" would have been maybe a year and probation....also he said he was a Christian before going to prison...and just became stronger while serving time...

 

[NATO AIR]

I just had a rather vicious argument with a Muslim friend that I don't think will be talking to me for a long while, but I can no longer accept this view of any form as Islam as "peaceful"

and i mean ANY... because all of these muslims in this country and the rest of the world are by and large silent on what's happening in their faith and are WILLINGLY allowing the jihadists to take over.

if they won't stand up and fight (via their outrage, fatwas, etc etc) then why should i respect or trust them?

Jihadist Islam is viciously murdering its own people in Iraq, Darfur and Afghanistan, to name the main theaters at this point. Expect more openings in the future at a high body count.

The jihadists are winning the war within Islam because the rest of the Muslims are abdicating their responsibilities in the fight.

 

[Annie]

Oh yeah, Saudi Arabia is NOT our friend:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006712

Subscriber Only:

Hypocrisy Most Holy
Muslims should show some respect to others' religions.

BY ALI AL-AHMED
Friday, May 20, 2005 12:01 a.m.

With the revelation that a copy of the Quran may have been desecrated by U.S. military personnel at Guantanamo Bay, Muslims and their governments--including that of Saudi Arabia--reacted angrily. This anger would have been understandable if the U.S. government's adopted policy was to desecrate our Quran. But even before the Newsweek report was discredited, that was never part of the allegations.

As a Muslim, I am able to purchase copies of the Quran in any bookstore in any American city, and study its contents in countless American universities. American museums spend millions to exhibit and celebrate Muslim arts and heritage. On the other hand, my Christian and other non-Muslim brothers and sisters in Saudi Arabia--where I come from--are not even allowed to own a copy of their holy books. Indeed, the Saudi government desecrates and burns Bibles that its security forces confiscate at immigration points into the kingdom or during raids on Christian expatriates worshiping privately.

Soon after Newsweek published an account, later retracted, of an American soldier flushing a copy of the Quran down the toilet, the Saudi government voiced its strenuous disapproval. More specifically, the Saudi Embassy in Washington expressed "great concern" and urged the U.S. to "conduct a quick investigation."

Although considered as holy in Islam and mentioned in the Quran dozens of times, the Bible is banned in Saudi Arabia. This would seem curious to most people because of the fact that to most Muslims, the Bible is a holy book. But when it comes to Saudi Arabia we are not talking about most Muslims, but a tiny minority of hard-liners who constitute the Wahhabi Sect.

The Bible in Saudi Arabia may get a person killed, arrested, or deported. In September 1993, Sadeq Mallallah, 23, was beheaded in Qateef on a charge of apostasy for owning a Bible. The State Department's annual human rights reports detail the arrest and deportation of many Christian worshipers every year. Just days before Crown Prince Abdullah met President Bush last month, two Christian gatherings were stormed in Riyadh. Bibles and crosses were confiscated, and will be incinerated. (The Saudi government does not even spare the Quran from desecration. On Oct. 14, 2004, dozens of Saudi men and women carried copies of the Quran as they protested in support of reformers in the capital, Riyadh. Although they carried the Qurans in part to protect themselves from assault by police, they were charged by hundreds of riot police, who stepped on the books with their shoes, according to one of the protesters.)

As Muslims, we have not been as generous as our Christian and Jewish counterparts in respecting others' holy books and religious symbols. Saudi Arabia bans the importation or the display of crosses, Stars of David or any other religious symbols not approved by the Wahhabi establishment. TV programs that show Christian clergymen, crosses or Stars of David are censored.

The desecration of religious texts and symbols and intolerance of varying religious viewpoints and beliefs have been issues of some controversy inside Saudi Arabia. Ruled by a Wahhabi theocracy, the ruling elite of Saudi Arabia have made it difficult for Christians, Jews, Hindus and others, as well as dissenting sects of Islam, to visibly coexist inside the kingdom.

Another way in which religious and cultural issues are becoming more divisive is the Saudi treatment of Americans who are living in that country: Around 30,000 live and work in various parts of Saudi Arabia. These people are not allowed to celebrate their religious or even secular holidays. These include Christmas and Easter, but also Thanksgiving. All other Gulf states allow non-Islamic holidays to be celebrated.

The Saudi Embassy and other Saudi organizations in Washington have distributed hundreds of thousands of Qurans and many more Muslim books, some that have libeled Christians, Jews and others as pigs and monkeys. In Saudi school curricula, Jews and Christians are considered deviants and eternal enemies. By contrast, Muslim communities in the West are the first to admit that Western countries--especially the U.S.--provide Muslims the strongest freedoms and protections that allow Islam to thrive in the West. Meanwhile Christianity and Judaism, both indigenous to the Middle East, are maligned through systematic hostility by Middle Eastern governments and their religious apparatuses.

The lesson here is simple: If Muslims wish other religions to respect their beliefs and their Holy book, they should lead by example.
Mr. al-Ahmed is director of the Saudi Institute in Washington.

 

[freeandfun1]

Did he explain the justification for changes to prison menus etc?

Sorry, I have been moving the last couple of days (my office) so I didn't see your post until now....

He just said the system wants to be "sensitive" to the Muslim beliefts.....

On one hand, they shit on the Bible and say the "Religion (Christianity only apparently) has NO place in the prison.... but on the other, they cater to another religion. And they call Christians hypocrites....

 

[freeandfun1]

I want to believe the guy...because if it were true I would have done the same...given the circumstances...however I was a little concerned about the 16 1/2 years imposed by "Involuntary manslaughter" this amount of time would be more in line with "Voluntary manslaughter" If he had a clean record the most he would have probably been given for "Involuntary" would have been maybe a year and probation....also he said he was a Christian before going to prison...and just became stronger while serving time...

I cannot comment at all since I don't know the laws of California (I believe that is where he said he was at). Frankly, it sounds like CA. Murder somebody outright and you get 10 years. Murder a rapist pig, and you get 16. Looks like CA logic to me.

Maybe what happened was he walked in on em, broke it up and then went back later and killed the guy with a bat. Kinda a delayed reaction. PTSD if you will. But the courts didn't see it that way and perhaps he really was convicted of voluntary manslaughter or 3rd degree murder or something like that. Emotional duress???