bin Laden's truce
-
...maybe we could agree to the truce and than just kill him - since secularism doens't forbid us to lie and cheat. :cool: "If anything, the West is awash in an epidemic of self-hate crimes." "a civilization that feels guilty for everything it is and does will lack the energy and conviction to defend itself"
if killing osama could stop America to invade muslim counteris and murdering of muslims then i would be the first one to support you.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
-
dharani wrote:
- Chengiz khan - he could have jolly well been just a king of his nomodic people . But islam entered mongolia some centuries before and the result was total destruction to the then north india , borders of europes and afganistan . He had butchered minimum a million lives . But the character of khan can not be directly linked to his relegion coz the huns whom the europeans feared most were also mongoloid - am not sure if they were muslims already
I am not sure if the rest of what you said is correct or not, but the above statement is not correct. Because Salman Khan, Aamir Khan, Zaheer Khan , Saif Ali Khan etc. are Muslims; You assumed Genghis Khan was a Muslim ? :-D Maybe Genghiz Khan was a Pathan taxi driver from Bhindibazar ?? :laugh: Please read this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol :
Various members of the Mongol Court, including Sorghaghtani Beki, were Nestorian Christians. While the court was nominally Buddhist and maintained a policy of being open to all religions, it was known as particularly sympathetic to Christians (which may have helped contribute to the legend of Prester John). In 1253 the court followed the suggestion of Crusader Kingdoms in Syria to attack the Muslim capitals of Baghdad and Cairo. Baghdad was conquered and sacked in 1258 with the city's Christians spared, and the Abbasid caliph killed. However, with the troops on the road to Cairo, Mongka Khan died in 1259 and much of the force returned home for the selection of the new leader. Egyptian troops finally repelled the attack in 1260. This, and ultimately the "gates of Vienna," marked the farthest West the Mongol Empire would progress.
After reading the article don't go around saying the Buddhists killed a lot of people. There is no evidence to suggest that Genghiz Khan was a Buddhist. It is a strong possibility than Genghiz Khan followed some pre Buddhist, Mongol religion. Jayaatu Khan the 13th Mongol Khan was a Buddhist. But that is 13 generations later.
-
Osama speaks[^] Al-Jazeera on Thursday aired an audiotape from Osama bin Laden who says al-Qaida is making preparations for attacks in the United States but offers a truce on "fair" but undefined conditions :~ Ummm... so he's offering a truce, but warns he's still going to attack. I'm assuming he's trying to appeal only to his followers by seeming like he's taking the high road, but not showing weakness by doing so. Who falls for this shit? "We do not mind offering you a long-term truce with fair conditions that we adhere to," he said. "We are a nation that God has forbidden to lie and cheat. So both sides can enjoy security and stability under this truce so we can build Iraq and Afghanistan, which have been destroyed in this war." BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wright-- modified at 15:32 Thursday 19th January, 2006
and it is rejected[^] by US In the audio message, Bin Laden appeared to suggest that a US withdrawal from Muslim lands could prompt agreement over a truce. if its all about pulling out US troops from Muslim counteris,thats a fair demand,agreeing with it doesn`t make me his fellow coz noone likes outsiders on his homeland,even US wouldnt tolerate french army on his land his threat to US citizens,no this is unfair and it shoudn`t be supported,i wonder why such silly statment could be taken seriously,at one hand you are going in agreement,while on other ur threatening, its like a-a=0 and as I had doubt, BBC also supported it that such threat would Boost Bush support by americans[^] from website: Americans hardly need a tape of Osama Bin Laden to remind them they are threatened by extremists, as the War on Terror has overshadowed their lives since 9/11.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
-
If you dig the combined history of central/south asia and europe , during the 11th - 12th century AD , many attacks from mongoloids happened to europe and asia . For example 1) Chengiz khan - he could have jolly well been just a king of his nomodic people . But islam entered mongolia some centuries before and the result was total destruction to the then north india , borders of europes and afganistan . He had butchered minimum a million lives . But the character of khan can not be directly linked to his relegion coz the huns whom the europeans feared most were also mongoloid - am not sure if they were muslims already ... 2)Timur -e- lang was the first central asain duke to have crossed himalayas to india during 11th century . He arrested .6 million hindus after they were defeated and paraded in a ground . The "e- lang" in his name means "limp" coz timur used to limp due to an injury . So when he was walking around the ground , a poor prisoner laughed for some reasons and timur was enraged . Within hours the heads of all the .6 million prisoners were chopped off . This is recorded history . 3)Just 400 years before , nadirshah - the king of persia (iran) defeated the mougal (muslim) king of india and held delhi under his control . And the delhi shopkeepers were teasing the soldiers of nadirshah , which resulted in the butchery of whole delhi down to a zero life . Its said , delhi was a city of vultures and foxes for many months after the massacre.... So history has somehow enabled us to have serious doubts on the basics governing islam ... redindian
dharani wrote:
the huns whom the europeans feared most were also mongoloid - am not sure if they were muslims already ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns The Hun conquests (300 to 500 A.D.) ended long before Islam was founded (between 570 and 632 A.D.)
-
*yawn* Krishna i am too lazy to search references about Hindu violence on his own ppl mentioned in their holy book,do search my post in same forum;) comeup with something neutral
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
Adnan Siddiqi wrote:
Hindu violence
But nothing on the scale of what was done by Muslims, and even if such a violence occured it has no religious justification. Killing has always been wrong whether an Hindu kills a Hindu or a Hindu kills a muslim. There is no distiction between believers and non-believers. Culture and religion have been independent to the most extent.
-
NO, you are wrong. All three believe in Abraham, that is about it. Muslims believe God dropped a book in the desert and gave it to Muhammad. So that means everything in the koran in written by God, and cannot be judged. It's final. So, knowing this. Read how women and non-believers should be treated, written by God, and tell me if that is the same forgiving God of the Christian God. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking" Kim0618 wrote: "the father of Bush's mother is also Bush's mother"
kgaddy wrote:
and tell me if that is the same forgiving God of the Christian God.
Yes, it is. :)
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
We weren't discussing history. But thank's for brilliant insight anyway ...
You are right, on both points. ;P
Stan Shannon wrote:
Obviously, thats where you got your education. At least it was free, eh?
No, it was not free, although probably much cheaper than in the USA. This explains the impressive amount of uneducated people you find there compared to other countries. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
Michel Prévost wrote:
This explains the impressive amount of uneducated people you find there compared to other countries.
If being uneducated means not being brought up to hate the US for no real reason, then yeah we're dumb. And we also have nice shiny boots to stick up your ass too. ;) Jeremy Falcon
-
I just did. The fundamental thing is that Islam basically rejects Christ, and instead follows on from the old testament in a way that's more in line with a strict, legalistic view of the OT. In that sense, the Jewish God and Allah are not as different from each other as they are both very different to the Christian God. A fundamental difference would be that Islam essentially rejects Christ, and Christ is the central platform of the Christian God's plan for His creation, and the expression of His nature. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
But is Allah or the Jewish God same as God the Father in the Holy Trinity.
-
For starters the book in my previous post is an excellent reference. The sword of the Prophet[^](PBUH) is also a good book. I believe that the number of Hindus, Buddhists and Zorastrians massacred by Muslim fanatics is more than the number of people killed in the name of religion by all other religions combined. The mountain range Hindu Kush actually means Hindu Slaughter. http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/hindu_kush.html[^] [1]. http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/007743.php[^] [2]. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=4649[^] [3]. Story of Islamic Imperailism by Sita Ram Goel[^]
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
The mountain range Hindu Kush actually means Hindu Slaughter.
The most likely meaning of Hindu Kush is "Killer of Hindus". I think the basic intention was to call the mountain range "killer of plainsmen". In those days most of the plainsmen they knew were Hindus.
Ibn Battuta (c. 1334) wrote:
"Another reason for our halt was fear of the snow, for on the road there is a mountain called Hindukush, which means "Slayer of Indians," because the slave boys and girls who are brought from India die there in large numbers as a result of the extreme cold and the quantity of snow.
Also please remember; a mountain range is a secular and inanimate object. :-D Re: The slavery part. I am not trying to justify any one, just pointing out facts. In those days every one took slaves whenever they got a chance. Many Muslim kings invaded other Muslim countries and took slaves from there as well.
-
But is Allah or the Jewish God same as God the Father in the Holy Trinity.
Problem is people are assuming that there are three books written by a 'god' 'His son' and 'The Prophet'(not sure about spelling here). It's three books written by people abusing the the fact that for a majority of people it's nessesary to have a higher goal presented to them, because being here without a reason is for them totally unacceptable. God (as in monoateism with just a single god) is a concept. He serves as a way to bring a goal into the lives of the followers, for a lot of people it's needed to have his goal spelled out a little more real than the concept of doing the 'right' thing just because it feels better. Unfortunately you can use the same concept to turn people towards a direction that is unwanted for the common good (until there are so many followers that it becomes the common good, morals and standards are subjective) I find the standards behind modern christianity more appealing (as opposed to I believe in God, I think I don't) but that's probably because of my upbringing. The concept of living a good life for whatever reason appeals to me but the religions mistreating it are a pain in the a**. (I think a lot of people who read this are going into attac mode... So be it... It's MY opinion and I am entitled to it... if you reply I may choose to ignore you :p )
-
Who did hit who first? That is the question. As my mom would say: "Stop that, I don't care who started!". -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
Yeah, this kind of goes back to the battle of Troy, and probably before. Ryan
O fools, awake! The rites you sacred hold Are but a cheat contrived by men of old, Who lusted after wealth and gained their lust And died in baseness—and their law is dust. al-Ma'arri (973-1057)
-
Michel Prévost wrote:
Any half literate person would have read carefully what I said about that.
What - 'and you possess divine truth' ? That's what I replied to.
Michel Prévost wrote:
were founded in the same 25 square meters
Really ? I thought Islam was founded in Africa, thanks for the insight.
Michel Prévost wrote:
I think it reasonable to think that Jehovah, Allah, and God are the same person
Well, that's just dumb on so many levels. 1. Have you read the Quran ? If not, how can you comment ? 2. If they are the same, why would Mohammed have bothered writing the Quran, if he had two other religions to choose from that were, according to you, the same ?
Michel Prévost wrote:
(I have no proof of that, but you may find on the Internet many articles about it, whether it is true or not, both sides have arguments).
Sure. My argument is that any suggestion that the god presented in the Quran is the same as the God of Christianity or even Judaism involves a lot of faith and a lot of refusing to read any of the texts involved.
Michel Prévost wrote:
Could you give an example?
The most obvious example I can think of is that in the NT, Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. In the Quran, Jesus is just a man. That's a pretty big part of the nature of the Christian God that Islam rejects, making the two entities fundamentally different. I also found heaps of stuff on how the Quran contradicts the Bible via google, but mostly with regard to the details of stories. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
Christian Graus wrote:
If they are the same, why would Mohammed have bothered writing the Quran, if he had two other religions to choose from that were, according to you, the same ?
The same reasons that inspired Saul, Brigham Young, Manicheus and many others.
Christian Graus wrote:
In the Quran, Jesus is just a man. That's a pretty big part of the nature of the Christian God that Islam rejects
So do some Christians, both now and during Mohammed's time. The Arian branch of christianity which originated in egypt considered jesus mortal, the belief was widespead among eastern christians until mohammeds time.
"A creation," said Arius, "is less than its creator. The Son is less than the Father that 'begot' him. In the Beginning was the Creator God and the Son did not exist."
Your faith is likely very different to that of many Christians of that time and now. Ryan
O fools, awake! The rites you sacred hold Are but a cheat contrived by men of old, Who lusted after wealth and gained their lust And died in baseness—and their law is dust. al-Ma'arri (973-1057)
-- modified at 7:41 Friday 20th January, 2006
-
and it is rejected[^] by US In the audio message, Bin Laden appeared to suggest that a US withdrawal from Muslim lands could prompt agreement over a truce. if its all about pulling out US troops from Muslim counteris,thats a fair demand,agreeing with it doesn`t make me his fellow coz noone likes outsiders on his homeland,even US wouldnt tolerate french army on his land his threat to US citizens,no this is unfair and it shoudn`t be supported,i wonder why such silly statment could be taken seriously,at one hand you are going in agreement,while on other ur threatening, its like a-a=0 and as I had doubt, BBC also supported it that such threat would Boost Bush support by americans[^] from website: Americans hardly need a tape of Osama Bin Laden to remind them they are threatened by extremists, as the War on Terror has overshadowed their lives since 9/11.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
Of course it's going to be rejected. bin Laden doesn't speak for either country he mentioned. He's not an official country spokesman and therefore has no rights in negotiations. BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wright -
Michel Prévost wrote:
This explains the impressive amount of uneducated people you find there compared to other countries.
If being uneducated means not being brought up to hate the US for no real reason, then yeah we're dumb. And we also have nice shiny boots to stick up your ass too. ;) Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
If being uneducated means not being brought up to hate the US for no real reason
It is amazing the conclusions people come to. I never said I hate the US. It is the current administration I don't like. Btw, I know lots of american, and they are not that uneducated. :) -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
-
Of course it's going to be rejected. bin Laden doesn't speak for either country he mentioned. He's not an official country spokesman and therefore has no rights in negotiations. BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wrightbut world says hes saudi arabian?;) regarldess what he say,isnt he gonna helpbush now?we might soon seen some new survey for bush support.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
-
but world says hes saudi arabian?;) regarldess what he say,isnt he gonna helpbush now?we might soon seen some new survey for bush support.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
Adnan Siddiqi wrote:
but world says hes saudi arabian?
And? I would be extremely shocked if he had the authority to speak on Saudi's behalf. The tape might boost Bush's poll standings briefly, though I doubt it, but so what? It's utterly meaningless. Few people in the US, except the media, pay attention to the polls unless there is an election at stake. BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wright -
Problem is people are assuming that there are three books written by a 'god' 'His son' and 'The Prophet'(not sure about spelling here). It's three books written by people abusing the the fact that for a majority of people it's nessesary to have a higher goal presented to them, because being here without a reason is for them totally unacceptable. God (as in monoateism with just a single god) is a concept. He serves as a way to bring a goal into the lives of the followers, for a lot of people it's needed to have his goal spelled out a little more real than the concept of doing the 'right' thing just because it feels better. Unfortunately you can use the same concept to turn people towards a direction that is unwanted for the common good (until there are so many followers that it becomes the common good, morals and standards are subjective) I find the standards behind modern christianity more appealing (as opposed to I believe in God, I think I don't) but that's probably because of my upbringing. The concept of living a good life for whatever reason appeals to me but the religions mistreating it are a pain in the a**. (I think a lot of people who read this are going into attac mode... So be it... It's MY opinion and I am entitled to it... if you reply I may choose to ignore you :p )
My question to Christian was placed to get a more theological understanding.
Rutger Ellen wrote:
The concept of living a good life for whatever reason appeals to me but the religions mistreating it are a pain in the a**.
I could not agree more.
-
Adnan Siddiqi wrote:
but world says hes saudi arabian?
And? I would be extremely shocked if he had the authority to speak on Saudi's behalf. The tape might boost Bush's poll standings briefly, though I doubt it, but so what? It's utterly meaningless. Few people in the US, except the media, pay attention to the polls unless there is an election at stake. BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wrightdear brain its you and me think ,majority of ignorants associate him with a muslim country then they make fun or bash my religion,and majority of posts by others would give you proof about it Polls re not necessary for elections too,i remmeber US citizens reacted a lot when lots of deadbodies were being sent from Iraq,then all of sudden OSama came in similarly in last election,tht was on nov4 i think,bush graph was low,all of sudden OSama came on tv in last week of october and bush graph went hight. this is the US nation,claims to be educated and intelligent but driven easily but army of few people.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
-
dear brain its you and me think ,majority of ignorants associate him with a muslim country then they make fun or bash my religion,and majority of posts by others would give you proof about it Polls re not necessary for elections too,i remmeber US citizens reacted a lot when lots of deadbodies were being sent from Iraq,then all of sudden OSama came in similarly in last election,tht was on nov4 i think,bush graph was low,all of sudden OSama came on tv in last week of october and bush graph went hight. this is the US nation,claims to be educated and intelligent but driven easily but army of few people.
http://weblogs.com.pk/kadnan | kadnan.blogspot.com | AJAX based Contact Form for Blogger or any other website
I'm not saying polls won't change, but what they mean isn't really always clear. You'd have to look at the specific questions, how they are asked, who asked them, who was asked. If polls jump after an Osama tape, it does little or nothing to change what is happening. The polls jump after quarterly news on the economy too, but over the long haul these are just blips. Most people I know aren't even talking about the tape. They simply don't care what Osama is saying. As for people bashing your religion: The main I reason I see for this is that, in the "west", we see little from the global Muslim community denouncing terrorist activities. What we hear is how Islam is a peaceful religion, but do not see how that peace is being spread. There is a double standard when it comes to accountability for actions. The west is corrupt, misinformed and evil, while Muslim's actions are justified no matter what. For example, why only become outraged at the US bombing in Pakistan, why not stand up and be outraged at car-bombers in Iraq who also kill innocent women and children? Maybe people are outraged, but that message is not getting through. There is no concerted effort against it. BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wright -
Christian Graus wrote:
What - 'and you possess divine truth' ? That's what I replied to.
But that was my reply to a reply of my reply.
Christian Graus wrote:
Really ? I thought Islam was founded in Africa, thanks for the insight.
You're welcome.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, that's just dumb on so many levels. 1. Have you read the Quran ? If not, how can you comment ? 2. If they are the same, why would Mohammed have bothered writing the Quran, if he had two other religions to choose from that were, according to you, the same ?
I don't have to read the Quran. There are lots of documentation about that, whether it is in favor of the idea or not. If you read my original reply, I say:
And also, many believe that the christian's God and Allah are the same "entity", but with different names, but I am not sure.
Please, don't make it look like I made a statement.
Christian Graus wrote:
Sure. My argument is that any suggestion that the god presented in the Quran is the same as the God of Christianity or even Judaism involves a lot of faith and a lot of refusing to read any of the texts involved.
That is your argument about the subject. I don't have any, I was just mentioning what some people believed (or not).
Christian Graus wrote:
The most obvious example I can think of is that in the NT, Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. In the Quran, Jesus is just a man. That's a pretty big part of the nature of the Christian God that Islam rejects, making the two entities fundamentally different. I also found heaps of stuff on how the Quran contradicts the Bible via google, but mostly with regard to the details of stories.
You refer to books that often contradicts themselves. Do you believe those books? They were written by lunatics. You know, people have different points of view that often differ, and often people don't agree with other's opinions, and go to war to crush them just because they don't think the same. I find this very dumb, whatever side does (mine or theirs). It is just plain stupid. And to justify their point of views, they write books about illuminations and revelations they had. Give me a break, here! On a totally unrelated note, I have a good movie suggestion for
Michel Prévost wrote:
You're welcome.
I guess my sarcasm was lost on you
Michel Prévost wrote:
You refer to books that often contradicts themselves. Do you believe those books? They were written by lunatics.
You're welcome to your opinion.
Michel Prévost wrote:
It is just plain stupid.
Obviously
Michel Prévost wrote:
And to justify their point of views, they write books about illuminations and revelations they had. Give me a break, here!
If this is reference to the Bible, you've obviously not got any idea what it says.
Michel Prévost wrote:
On a totally unrelated note, I have a good movie suggestion for you:
Brilliant movie. Did you know that movie started as a joke that they were going to do a film about Christ, they read the new testament and decided not to do a film about Him directly, because they decided He was actually a decent bloke you said some good things ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++