[Voice in your head]

I realize that this is a touchy subject to some. Many posts mentioning Islam result in the expressions of desire for less than tasteful fates to befall certain Muslims, pseudo-Muslims, or even Muslims in general. Those desires may be well-founded, but I am hoping to receive legitimate input on this, such as responses containing fact and reason. If something is evil or wrong, it should be easy to argue against.

Disclaimer: I used "mujahideen" and "terrorists" in the same sentence, though I realize that this may sound redundant to some. But, to be objective, according to “moderate” Muslims, there are legitimate mujahideen. These include those who fought the Soviets/Russians in Afghanistan and Chechnya, and the Serbs in Bosnia. Terrorists, such as those who murdered Americans on 9/11/01, those who continue to murder Israelis, those who murder American servicemen in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar, and those who murder our diplomats throughout the Middle East and Africa do not fit the definition of jihad, given by Imam Tammam Adi, above.

[metesky]

You're either gonna get your a$$ kicked or get totally ignored for this one.

[keithtoo]

First of all, a 'crusade' is not a required act of Christian orthodoxy. Viewed over the 2000 years of Christianity, it is an aberration, not a constant.

I dont really find much fault in Christians wanting to rid the holy land of Muslim control, in that Muslims were forbidding Christians access to Jerusalem. That is what initiated the crusades.

As a Protestant, I really dont have ANY religious attachment to ANY shrine or piece of geography. I do have an emotional attachment to Israel, as that is where Jesus walked, but if I never go there, I wont be any the worse for it.

As I understand it, Jihad (personal or militant) IS a requirement of a devout Muslim. So comparing a Christian definition of crusade and a Muslim definition of Jihad, is not legitimate.

NO Christian feels the need to go on a crusade, period.

As a matter of fact, the founding doctrine of Protestantism, is that salvation comes not by ANY works that we do, but thru faith alone.

[Angelus Errare]

1. Because the wars the Crusaders were fighting in were, at least initially, just wars. Additionally, the Crusades initial and well-defined goal and guidelines to it, that being the liberation of Jerusalem and freedom of the rather large Christian minorities in the Middle East. But in its current Wahhabi/Khomeinist incarnation, military jihad has no end, with no possibility of reconciliation between Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb. This cannot be said for the Crusades.

2. Almost certainly. However, all religions have had militant strains to them at some point or another. That is simply the way things go because, according to my own Catholic beliefs, humans are sinner. But no Catholic leader today is calling upon his followers to go out and slaughter infidels. The same cannot be said of contemporary Wahhabi clerics in Saudi Arabia, hence the current conflict.

3. No, because Crusade at least had a clearly defined goal. Al-Qaeda's jihad is not truly bent on removing US troops from Saudi Arabia but rather upon exporting Wahhabism onto the world stage as the premier ideology of Islam in order to launch a general uprising throughout the Muslim world in order to provoke a clash of civilizations. They believe that they can win such a confrontation, but I am somewhat skeptical in this regard.

4. No. While Islam, like any other faith, has its nasty and nice streaks, but the current sect in ascendance today throughout the Muslim world, Wahhabism, is uncompromisingly militant. I recommend "The Kingdom: Arabia and the House of Saud" by Robert Lacey for a good (abeit uncompromisingly pro-Saudi) look at how the sect was founded. Everywhere it goes it has left violence, bloodshed, and oppression. Every Sunni terrorist group on the planet is Wahhabi, simply speaking. The War on Terror will end when sect either adapts its teachings to become less militant or suffers the fate of the Cathari.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Before getting caught up with Holy views that transcend the ordinary man, one ought to understand the Crusades are a reaction to the onslaught of militant Islam. That the ordinary man can understand.

[aimhigh]

Could it be that simple illiteracy and lack of education is the root of hatred in the Middle East and the source from which the literate spiritual leaders are able to exert their influence over the people?

The liberals like this explanation, but it's not quite reality. In Spencer's book, ISLAM UNVEILED, he lays out how Islam rejected intellectualism, philosophy and science about a thousand years ago. For instance, scientific laws are rejected as blasphemy, since it would box in Allah. Islam is the source of the corruption, not illiteracy.

Most of your questions are fully answered in ISLAM UNVEILED. He lays out why Islam can't support democracy, freedom, etc. The foundational books of Islam (Koran, Sharia, etc) mitigate against moderation.

[Incorrigible]

 

Say good knight to Crusade clichés [Paul Mulshine]

 

[Lady Heron]

The Crusade was in reaction to the slaughter of Christians by islamic hoards. Many of the worst things done in the Christian world have been done to stop the advances of islam and its demand of our conversion or death. There is no call for the killing of non-Christians in the Bible unlike the call for jihad in the koran and the subjection and conversion of the world to islam by the sword if necessary. To be a Christian is a personal choice unlike islam's demand for conversion or your death. The meaning of the sword on the Saudi flag.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Frankly I think we should be thankful that the Crusaders undertook their missions. Otherwise there's a good possiblity we'd all be speaking arabic now.

And if we don't watch out we're going to be in trouble again.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

From the "holy" Qur'an:
"[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
[9.30] And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"


- That describes Islam's continuing objection to Christians and Jews and what your future is if they have control. This passage is the central belief of militant Islamists. There is no getting around it. It makes clear that not only is anyone who does not believe in Islam to be killed or enslaved, but anyone who does not *enforce* Islam on those under and around them is an enemy. -


From the "holy" Qur'an:
"[9.12] And if they break their oaths after their agreement and (openly) revile your religion, then fight the leaders of unbelief-- surely their oaths are nothing-- so that they may desist."
"[9.32] They desire to put out the light of Allah with their mouths, and Allah will not consent save to perfect His light, though the unbelievers are averse."


- 9:12 & 9:32 make it clear that simple speech is considered an attack on Islam and to be responded to with force. -


From the "holy" Qur'an:
"[9.33] He it is Who sent His Apostle with guidance and the religion of truth, that He might cause it to prevail over all religions, though the polytheists may be averse."


- As the foregoing shows, this is to be done by force. -


From the "holy" Qur'an:
"[9.38] O you who believe! What (excuse) have you that when it is said to you: Go forth in Allah's way, you should incline heavily to earth; are you contented with this world's life instead of the hereafter? But the provision of this world's life compared with the hereafter is but little.
[9.39] If you do not go forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement and bring in your place a people other than you, and you will do Him no harm; and Allah has power over all things.
[9.40] If you will not aid him, Allah certainly aided him when those who disbelieved expelled him, he being the second of the two, when they were both in the cave, when he said to his companion: Grieve not, surely Allah is with us. So Allah sent down His tranquillity upon him and strengthened him with hosts which you did not see, and made lowest the word of those who disbelieved; and the word of Allah, that is the highest; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.
[9.41] Go forth light and heavy, and strive hard in Allah's way with your property and your persons; this is better for you, if you know."

Shakir Translation (searchable)
http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/

[antaresequity]

For me its allot easier [it needs to be]....

We are engaged in a crusade of liberty and freedom against a jihad of tyranny, terror and Islamic oppression.

I don't really care what the actual word definitions are...I know what it is, you know what it is, and the friggin islamo-terrorist rag heads know what it is...

I don't care if you call it tiddly-winks...

Every single Islamo-Facisit Terrorist or BELIEVER...should be eradicated from this planet.

[Centurion2000]

bump for later