well i strongly believe that religion is the major cause of all the problems we have in the world today cos some islamic fascist would not just allow others to have freedom of expression

i beleive we should start getting ready for another wave of riots , and opportunity to kill infidels cos POPE have just givene them another round of excuse when he said his mind about writtings inthe korean .

u can check here http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060916/ap_on_re_mi_ea/pope_muslims

and also here http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060916/wl_mideast_afp/vaticanpopeislam_060916074236
now tell me would there be any lasting peace.

just like afam would say when all the players come together then we would have peace, with recent developments from articles i just paisted the link do we really think the players will ever come together?
and mind u this not A US policy.

in support of mariory earlier, when this folks dont see reasons to kill non muslim they claim it is US policy, they should also use nigeria as an excuse after all the policy on the niger delta does not favour the niger deltans

Kaecy5,

The statement made by the Pope is wrong or better put, inappropriate, the Vatican has stated that the Pope did not mean to insult the muslims, now, if the Pope really did not mean to do so all that is required is for him to apologize for the statements and retract them.

Pope John Paul spent 25 years building bridges across religions and the present Pope has just spent about 1 year and is already making statements that tend to create bad blood between islam and christianity.

Do not also forget that the Pope quoted something an emperor stated and what do you expect an emperor who fought wars in promoting a particular religion to say about a "rival" religion?

Regardless of whether we agree with another person's religion or not, we do not have a right to ridicule or insult that religion because religion is something that is personal and questioning or making insulting remarks on the very foundation of a particular religion amounts to insulting every single person that practices such religion.

It is becoming repulsive reading some posts where all we do is try to excuse the causes of problems while blaming in full measure reactions trailing avoidable provocations.

It is indeed very hard for one to become a good christain because it is difficult for many to pratice what they preach.

And which is easier to do, avoid problems or to solve them?

Afam:

Like I stated earlier, you are finding it supremely difficult to make any meaningful contribution on this thread since we all advocated for discussing the real problems in the middle east. I get to read from you these days only when you want to discuss Afam, shame on you.

Your opinion has been noted and duly disregarded.

This thread has gone far off course. Therefore the discussions are not meaningful as far as I'm concerned. You will see me post when wrong information is posted and it is passed off as accurrate. I have better things to do than to discuss you or your deluded opinions on Middle East peace.

Can someone please give us the full meaning of Article 3 of the Geneva Convention. While some will want to put every blame on Bush, they will never come up with what should be an acceptable alternative. What some will regard as a violation of their personal dignity means nothing to others. I am reminded of El Hadji Diouf who went crazy on a football lfan just because the guy touched his head in a show of affection. If someone like that was a terrorist, he would be in a position to sue his interrogator for violation of the Geneva Article 3 if they so much as touched his head. This is why that Article has to be clarified and Bush has done the right thing by asking Congress to clarify its meaning. Is this too hard for reasonable people to understand?

@kaecy5,
I agree with you to a great extent about the place of religion in world conflict. It is unfortunate, but that is what it boils down to on the long run. Civilizations are at war, and the defining instrumentalities of these civilizations are Christianity and Islam.

I applaud the Pope for his statement, and I think he is a very bold and brave man. While many of us will like to sweep the real issues under carpet, he believes it is time to address them in a spirit of dialogue. Those who take his statement out of context are just so insincere. Of course we will expect outrageous reactions from muslims all over the world. That is not the fault of the Pope. If their religion teaches them to seek peace and eschew violence, then they will have learned to pursue their grievances through other means. Unfortunately, the Pope's statement has only given them an excuse to go on a mad rampage again. With or without the Pope, they will always find an excuse to be violent so as to kill or be killed in the name of Allah for bountiful reward in the hereafter.

The German Chancellor has defended the Pope and I believe those who are not intimidated by a political or civil backlash will voice their support of the Pope.

I find those who compare Christianity with Islam (citing their history) to be shallow of understanding. If you notice, the Pope made direct mention of Mohammed, the founder of Islam. If indeed, we are trying to do an unbiased comparisons of both religions and what they stand for, then we will compare Mohammed's example to Jesus', and not compare the adherents of both faiths who may not have followed the teachings and admonitions of their leaders in toto.

To Muslims, the Pope's statement should get them thinking why the world considers them and their faith violent. Their reaction should be to find ways to launder their image through the mass media and a genuine effort to seek peace with people of all faiths. Rather, they will be true to their nature and our fears, and go on a bloody carnage again. What a religion of Peace indeed.

Just because religion is used as an instrument in this war, does not mean the war is about religion. What was the war between the Hezbollah and Israelis about? Why were the Hezbollah labeled as terrorists? How come no one has picked up on my statement about the Jewish terrorists in the 1940s? Could the reason be that they dont fit into the 'criteria' for being a terrorist i.e Muslim?

@ Brown-Eyes, I brought up this exact point ages ago on this thread, and it was conveniently ignored. Don't expect any less. . .

How come no one has picked up on my statement about the Jewish terrorists in the 1940s? Could the reason be that they don't fit into the 'criteria' for being a terrorist i.e Muslim?

So are you trying to justify terrorism by that statement?

Brown-Eyes:

Just because religion is used as an instrument in this war, does not mean the war is about religion. What was the war between the Hezbollah and Israelis about? Why were the Hezbollah labeled as terrorists? How come no one has picked up on my statement about the Jewish terrorists in the 1940s? Could the reason be that they don't fit into the 'criteria' for being a terrorist i.e Muslim?

Can you kindly provide a dossier on the number of embassies bombed, aircraft hijacked, twin towers destroyed and thousands of innocent civilians killed by these Jewish "terrorists". Do you perchance have any idea as to how many times Kenya, Madrid, London, Java, NY, Bombay have been suicide bombed by these Jewish "terrorists"? Is it possible that you could provide details as to the number of tourists these "terrorists" have shot while shouting "Yawheh is great"?
Did they threaten to liberate Nigeria? Did they capture any journalist and force them to convert to judaism at gunpoint?

Please any attempt to shed more light on these questions will be very greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

@Brown-eyes

Don't forget that the Jewish terrorists of the 40s were roundly condemned as terrorists event they were involved in an independence struggle.Some of the Muslim terrorists are simply fighting out of religious extremism

@ Davidylan

Say pretty please.

@ 4Play

At least you acknowledged there were Jewish terrorists. Yes there are some people that fight to the extreme in the name of religion but that should not relegate terrorism to just Islam.


@TayoD

Look at the BNP and National Front. One is a political party campaigning for the rights of English people whilst the other is an extremist group linked to the BNP that has attracted a few nutters who aim to kill anyone darker than them. Within those groups, do we call all of them killers based on the actions of the nutters? Do we then call all White people racists based on the actions of those Dickheads?
How am i justifying terrorism? By not believing in painting every Muslim with the same brush?

@Chxta

I think some people don't like Muslims regardless of what the evidence shows. Meanwhile the real war carries on undetected cleverly camouflaged by this war against terror/Islam.

TayoD:

I applaud the Pope for his statement, and I think he is a very bold and brave man. While many of us will like to sweep the real issues under carpet, he believes it is time to address them in a spirit of dialogue. Those who take his statement out of context are just so insincere. Of course we will expect outrageous reactions from muslims all over the world. That is not the fault of the Pope. If their religion teaches them to seek peace and eschew violence, then they will have learned to pursue their grievances through other means. Unfortunately, the Pope's statement has only given them an excuse to go on a mad rampage again. With or without the Pope, they will always find an excuse to be violent so as to kill or be killed in the name of Allah for bountiful reward in the hereafter.

To Muslims, the Pope's statement should get them thinking why the world considers them and their faith violent. Their reaction should be to find ways to launder their image through the mass media and a genuine effort to seek peace with people of all faiths. Rather, they will be true to their nature and our fears, and go on a bloody carnage again. What a religion of Peace indeed.

Well, thankfully, while some of us applaud the Pope for such a wrong statement, the Pope has stated that he was deeply sorry especially for the problems the statement has caused.

I only hope that more and more people will be bold enough to apologise when they make mistakes as no one is perfect.

For those promoting war and hatred, leave discussion forum and head to the war zone to prove your point.

Influential Qatari Muslim scholar, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, called for a day of anger on Friday, saying the Pope had not apologised.

And Afam I would get back to you to see how the apology has calmed the nerves of blood hungry Mohammedanists
If we dont have any more killing around the world even after ther apology I would stop making posts on Nairaland
I am very sure that after the apology there would be more blood spilling I hope I would be proved wrong

I am very sure that there would be more Bloody protests and I hope Afam can give me an assurance that there wont be more

At least seven churches have now been attacked since the speech in areas under the Palestinian Authority.

There was concern that the killing of an Italian missionary nun by gunmen in Mogadishu, Somalia, was in retaliation for the comments

What is about to happen will further demonstrate how peaceful, tolerant and fair these fundamentalists are.
This was the pope's speech and quote from the emperor:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html

In the seventh conversation (διάλεξις - controversy) edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Muhammad was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "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". The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably (σὺν λόγω) is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats, To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death, ".


The pope has apologised for quoting a text from history of which he has studied which was taken out of context (as can be seen from the full quote) by fundamentalist to further their jihad against infidels. These prehistoric Neantherthals are now asking for a 'day of anger'

No doubt this is a result of US policy and the existence of Israel. So we are to believe religion and Islam is now a no go area. Unbelievable and absolutely laughable. Lunacy at it's best.

@Dayokanu,

Even Hamas leader stated on CNN that no one should attack their christain brothers and sisters in Palestine.

It is better for us to remove the causes of the bad blood so that we can listen to the excuses people give for fighting and killing innocent ones.

If possible, let the injustices be addressed and let us see the excuses that Osama will cite to carry out attacks against US & co.

Mutual respect is key.

@afam
1. All muslims want to kill all jews and christains.
2. Everything must be done to kill all muslims
3. Causing wars in places like Afghanistan and Iraq remains one of the best strategies.
4. The arabs don't want peace, so no need to pursue any peace initiative


wel u have answered the basic question all of us wanted to hear
infact am so happy that i would suppor toption 4 anyday
since the arabs dont want peace lets give them a little of their own posion

well if binladin and crew are fighting in the name of their god
then it is permissible for bush to be fighting under the pretext of his own god

mind u for republicans to be putting up a show of not supporting bush is just a political plan so as to convert regular by standers to beleive the party is have the people in mind, cos their support base would increase

so dnt be deceived 419 does not happen only in nigeria

Kaecy5,

Thanks for your post.

But again those statements are statements I feel that some of us (not all of us as you stated) on this forum believe in, they are certainly not statements of fact.

I wouldn't know why the republicans are opposing the president, all I know is that they are opposing him and I do not believe they are doing so sway public opinion to their party as you put it.

well if binladin and crew are fighting in the name of their god
then it is permissible for bush to be fighting under the pretext of his own god

Unfortunately, Osama has a better justification when compared to Bush because Osama cites the injustices in Palestine (and we know injustices are live there) while Bush keeps talking about an endless war on terror as if terror is a target that can be defeated instead of waging war on those that attacked the US on 911 and not plunging Iraq into the mess it is in today even when Iraq had nothing to do with 911 (and this grave mistake has helped in breeding more haters of US than Osama would have ever been able to breed).

Well, thankfully, while some of us applaud the Pope for such a wrong statement, the Pope has stated that he was deeply sorry especially for the problems the statement has caused.

I only hope that more and more people will be bold enough to apologise when they make mistakes as no one is perfect.

For those promoting war and hatred, leave discussion forum and head to the war zone to prove your point.

That the Pope is sorry for the resulting mayhem that his statement has caused does not mean his statement was wrong. Rather, it means he was naive enough to believe that he can discuss real issues with muslims who are definitely not on the same rational wavelength with the rest of civilization. So now it is wrong to discuss Islam in any way, yet they blast their damned loudspeakers early in the morning to disturb our neighbourhoods, it is wrong for a cartoonist to carry out his lawful, constitutionally protected right to free speech in order not to hurt the shallow sensibilities of these people. Even a Pope can not call them to dialogue through reason while establishing the fact that the perception of Islam as a religion of violence is not something that started today.

All I can say now is for every body to watch out. There is a Jihad coming close to your doors, and woe betide you if you dare say anything about the 'religion of peace'.

When the jihad comes, I will gladly defend christianity and pay the supreme price if necessary.

Christains should never be afraid to die for Christ. As a christian, I hope people should respect what I believe in even if they don't agree with it. I do not need anyone telling me that Christ may not have actually died and arose. I do not need anyone questioning my hope and belief that I will make heaven and live a a place where the streets will be decorated with gold. I do not need people talking to me about the notion of bigbang theory and creation not to talk about life after death.

Even if my belief is faulty, let me be, that is my choice and I will die believing in it rather than consider any other religion.

Being a good christian is not about rubbishing other peoples religion, that is certainly not what the bible teaches unless some of us have our own special bibles.

What makes the statement right? That an emperor said so? Or that a Pope quoted a statement made by an emperor who was spreading christianity in Turkey I think?

Can we move away from this blind commendation or condemnation of positions based on specific mindsets and focus on the root causes of the problems?

And the cartoonist does not have any right under the sun to make jest of any religion for that matter. Please, read your statements well before posting them.

Afam:

Can we move away from this blind commendation or condemnation of positions based on specific mindsets and focus on the root causes of the problems?

And the cartoonist does not have any right under the sun to make jest of any religion for that matter. Please, read your statements well before posting them.

1. What "root causes" are you talking about? Is US policy and the existence of Isreal the reason northern Nigerian muslims attack their southern Nigerian neighbors? So those "root causes" are the reason darfur is in crisis today? Is it the same "root causes" that are behind al qeada's recent threat to attack France?

2. No sir, no cartoonist has the right under the moon to make jest of any religion but it is perfectly within the boundaries of free speech for Iran to organise a holocaust cartoon competition? It is also within the boundaries of free speech for holocaust cartoons to hang in the Iranian national museum and for Ahmedinajad to call for the destruction of another sovereign nation?

So much for hypocrisy!

@Davidylan,

The last time I heard from you on this thread you copied some part of my response to prove that I supported what I did not support. I guess my response with the complete statement must have exposed your dirty game.

Some minutes ago, I uncovered another shameless and unsuccessful attempt to credit someone else's post to Afam, how far can you go?

See the link incase you claim you don't know what I am talking about - https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-23563.96.html#msg613604

As regards cartoons in Iran concerning Holocauts and Israel, do you want my opinion or what?

The cartoons are wrong, no excuses for that.

You better wake up from your dangerous mindset of "you are either with us 100% or you are against us".

There are people that are still able to condemn what is condemnable and at the same time commend what is commendable.

It is like your new song now is hypocrisy even when you don't mind lying and manufacturing lies to make your point.

Afam:

Some minutes ago, I uncovered another shameless and unsuccessful attempt to credit someone else's post to Afam, how far can you go?

See the link incase you claim you don't know what I am talking about - https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-23563.96.html#msg613604

You seem to be spoiling for a fight already! Seemingly unfortunate seeing i had already appologized for the mix up and corrected it!

Afam:

As regards cartoons in Iran concerning Holocauts and Israel, do you want my opinion or what?

The cartoons are wrong, no excuses for that.
You better wake up from your dangerous mindset of "you are either with us 100% or you are against us".

There are people that are still able to condemn what is condemnable and at the same time commend what is commendable.

It is like your new song now is hypocrisy even when you don't mind lying and manufacturing lies to make your point.

The holocaust cartoons are wrong! Is it possible to explain the rationale behind the fact that Isreal is yet to demand a "full and public apology" for the cartoons that are still gleefully hanging in the Iranian national museum? Why is Isreal yet to send suicide bombers into Iran? Why are flags not being burnt, embassies bombed, mosques destroyed and 70-yr old imams shot dead on account of this "provocation"? Or is that Iran's right to free speech too?

As for the ""you are either with us 100% or you are against us" quote; remember Jesus once said "He that is not with us is against us", i dont remember HIM saying "he that is not with us is either against us or a moderate"!

Moderates are more dangerous than those in the clear opposition, at least we know where they stand!

@Davidylan,

I have retracted the words when I read your post stating it was a mistake. Don't have time for fights.

I don't know if you are asking me why Israel has not sent suicide bombers into Iran based on the cartoons or not. Israel has more than enough weapons (including nuclear weapons) so suicide bombing won't be a viable alternative.

On the issue of the either you are with us or you are against us though ideal in theory is dangerous in practice. A real example being the case of either Bush and his war on terror or Osama and his jihad against the West.

In either case, I find anyone that completely supports any of these two dangerous people as part of the problem because they have contributed to the killing of innocent ones and there is no excuse for that.

Peharps for every threat of an attack, for every cleric that disrepects the secular way of life in the West, The West should organise a day of anger. And burn Flags of Islamic countries. Also the West should go ahead and attack embassies of those Islamic countries on their soil. And send "special crusade forces" and "freedom fighters" to attack vunrable civilian targets in the Islamic countries.

The West should also use reckless rethoric like, Iran should be exterminated from the human race and all people must be christains. Or they should make statements like Islamic countries should be wiped off the face of the Earth, or statements like "Holy Crusades against unbelievrs". The West should also issue fatwas against Countries and important people in those countries anytime they criticise the way of life in the West.

The pope should start saying things like killing unbelievers by chopping off their heads will make you go straight to heaven. However, he should add a side comment and say Christianity is a religion of peace.

Yeah that's what should happen.

No doubt this is also because of US foreign policy and Israel.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/5356126.stm

Yet more "peaceful" threats from a the religion that indeed is the bastion of "peace"

Al-Qaida warns pope he, west are doomed
Al-Qaida in Iraq and its allies warned Pope Benedict XVI on Monday that he and the West were "doomed" and proclaimed that the holy war would continue until Islam dominates the world.
"You infidels and despotic, we will continue our jihad (holy war) and never stop until God avails us to chop your necks and raise the fluttering banner of monotheism when God's rule is established governing all people and nations," the statement said.

Now they have simply revealed what we knew all along, that terrorism was not really about "palestinian injustice and deepseated wounds" but about a covert attempt to conquer the world for Islam!

Democracy at work here, I hope Bush respects the will of the senate as they respresent the Americans.

What you do not understand is that Americans are more in support of Bush when the issue is homeland security. The only problem he has is Iraq and that is the cause of his falling, now rising polls.

You all shouldn't take my statements to mean what I did not intend.

Making jest of people's religion is not the best thing to do. However, we need to understand that the guys have not done anything "illegal". Those cartoonists have not done anything against their constitution and have not violated the law of free speech. However, we all know that "with great power comes great responsibilities" (one of my best quotes of all time from Spider Man movie), so we would have expected those cartoonist to have shown more sense of responsibilities by refraining from such provocative posts.

On the other hand, that someone hurts your sensibilities is not enough ground for you to go on a mad rampage. Make fun of Jesus all you want, claim he is a homosexual, a sexual pervert or whatever else you want to say. That will not make us as Christians, go on such mad rampage. Rather, we will use all our constitutional means to get a redress, and will go all out to educate you and enlightene you, but never blow ourselves up in hope that killing you will be doing God a favour.

Jesus said, there will always be offences, but then, who are you to cause a greater offence by killing other people. We can't step into their countries, yet they are willing to dictate to us what we should do in our countries through threats and intimidation. Until they learn that peace is more effective than the sword, then it will continually be a tit-for-tat. No amount of threat and terror will change the free world. A peaceful, and purposeful movement stand a much better chance.

@TayoD,

You are providing conflicting information here.

First you stated the republicans are opposing Bush so that they can make bystanders support them.

Now you claim that americans are more in support of Bush when the issue is homeland security.

My dear, Iraq is part of Bush's homeland security project and the issue in question that even resulted in powerful republications voicing their oppositions to Bush had to do with Bush seeking harsher interrogation for terrorist suspects.

So, what would you rather have us believe, that america is so sophisticated in politics that when democrats and some republicans oppose a president it means that the president has a better support?

Rising polls? From where? To where?

Any links will do please as I have not seen anything nor heard any news in that regard.

On cartoons and free speech

We must know where our rights end and where those of others begin. You have said it all when you stated that the cartoonists should have shown more sense of responsibilities by refraining from such provocative posts.

Afam:

On cartoons and free speech

We must know where our rights end and where those of others begin. You have said it all when you stated that the cartoonists should have shown more sense of responsibilities by refraining from such provocative posts.

This statement is only valid as long as those who claim infringement of their religious rights are also willing to accord others the same rights they demand. For muslims to cry foul over the Mohammedan cartoons is pure hypocrisy when their own museums are full of anti-christian and anti-semitic cartoons!

@ Afam,

Here's the link you wanted.  http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/09/15/032930.php   http://www.fox28.com/News/index.php?ID=4418 http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/17498.html

I have not provided you with any contradictions.  A Senator's stand is not necessarily that of his constituency.  I have heard a Senator say that his conscience guides his decision ahead of his constituency.  Bush is rated very highly with regards to defending America from terrorism. That is an indisputable fact.

@TayoD,

If you believe that a senator (even though elected) can take a stand that does not represent his/her constituency, why then is it difficult for you to believe that Osama (never elected) may not be taking a stand based on what moslems want?

I have seen the links posted. Hovering about 40% still does not amount to very high rating to me sha.

Take care.

@Afam,

I said his ratings was rising and not that it is very high. Don't misunderstand me.

I never said Osama represented the Islamic faith. I have insisted all along that Mohammed is the role model for every muslim and that they all take their cue from his sayings and his lifestyle. Understanding Mohammed's sayings and lifesyle is what will give us a better understanding of their mindset.

You have made a case consistently that the cause of the violence is injustice. May I ask what injustice suffered by these muslims that has led to the killing of that Nun. Does the Pope's personal opinion amount to meting out injustice? If Christinas are like these folks, there would have been a lot of mosques up in flames by now with the burning of the effigy of the Pope. But since they have the 'God- given right' to the monolpoly of violence in response to every perceived notion of injustice, then they will continually subject the rest of us to these acts of terrorism.

You made a note-worthy statement earlier about being ready to die for your faith. The difference between you and the average muslim out there is that while you will lay down your life for your faith, they are ready to kill you on account of their faith. These are two different mind sets altogether. If there were more people like you in the middle east, suicide bombings will never take root as it has today. And why do you have such a mind-set? Because you have seen the examples of Jesus and His early Disciples. Same is true of Muslims, the examples of Mohammed and his early followers is what makes them what they are today: peaceful when convenient and violent when provoked.

@TayoD,

I have seen the links posted. Hovering about 40% still does not amount to very high rating to me sha.

was based on this

Bush is rated very highly with regards to defending America from terrorism. That is an indisputable fact.

The killing of the nun is wrong and unfortunate.

I will not want to go into labelling a religion bad or good.

I can comfortably discuss specific actions of people but the religion itself or the symbol/ideology behind a religion? Not me.

We may be going round in circles here because not all moslems are "terrorists" unless you are saying that those moslems that are not "terrorist" are not good moslems.

I hear it is against the law for a man to marry more than one wife in Tunisia yet in some countries it is ok to marry up to 4 wives.

These are issues that are fundamental to people and though we may not agree with them, we are bound to respect them.