Quick correction (I was expecting someone else to pick it up). As examples of Islamic countries that are relatively peaceful and democratic, I listed 'Brunei and Dubai' obviously Dubai aint no country...I meant of course United Arab Emirates, of which Dubai is the either classified as one of said Emirates, or the capital (Dubai City). Sorted.

Anyway, Banjo - either you didn't notice the point I was trying to make, or you ignored it: the point being that blaming the Islamic religion for the atrocities occuring in some Islamic countries makes as much sense as using the Islamic religion to justify them.

I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that much violence exists without Islam, and that much of Islam exists without violence.

I pointed to other, more sensible possible causes of these atrocities, such as poverty and oppression. In your response, you stated that these atrocities are carried out in the name of Islam. I agree - people often use religion as justification for horrific crimes. But no passage of rational thought could ever reach the conclusion that the religion itself is to blame. If a crazy fringe organisation started bombing schools in the name of Buddha, would Buddhism be to blame?

I hope the sillyness of this question helps to illustrate what I'm trying to express here...won't hold my breath though..

spendocrat, the area of conflict today the world over involves Muslim and people of other faiths and also between Muslims themselves. The protestants and catholics have since stopped their senseless killing.

The problem has to do with Islam as a political system and a religion that seek to establish the kingdom of allah on earth through violence. No surprises that the symbol of Saudi Arabia flag is a sword.

Wafa Sultan and Tawfik Hamid were two Muslims who have intimate knowledge about Islam. They are Arabs and are secular. It is people like them that give the Arabs hope and Muslim countries a chance to progress beyond the Middle-age. The links are to some of their speeches and interviews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxfo11A7XuA {into a Muslim's mind Tawfik Hamid}
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBrHIa34ydg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU5Br7YHmsQ&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBrHIa34ydg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WLoasfOLpQ&mode=related&search=

Are you seriously trying to convince me that the Islamic religion has a specific purpose of world domination? And it isn’t just the fundamentalist nutjobs who claim this to be the case? Because that sounds a tad...paranoid to me. And probably to the billion+ Muslims across the globe who have in fact never bombed a car or chopped off a head, and seem to want little more than to live their lives in peace.

I thought my core sentiment was fairly simple, but it seems as though it has been overlooked yet again. The fact that you’ve stated ‘the protestants and catholics have since stopped their senseless killing’ is testament to this - you’re identifying individuals by their religion. This is irrational. The belief system of any given individual does not dictate whether said individual will be violent, crazy, normal, happy, sad, whatever. If you’re poor, oppressed, abused and fed BS your whole life, it doesn’t matter what belief system you have: you’re gonna be messed up.

Unfortunately, there’s a culture of poor, oppressed etc people in a number of countries where Islam is the official religion. Because Islam is the dominant belief system in these countries, it is generally used as the justification for atrocities (and from an outsiders point of view, often blamed for the atrocities). Make sense? If, say, all Islamic countries suddenly swapped religions with all the Christian countries, there’s literally no reason why Christianity wouldn’t be used as justification for the same atrocities. I’m getting sick of typing the word ‘atrocities’. But uh, yeah, changing the religion wouldn't change the fact that fundamentalists are completely insane.

I’m just saying you can’t blame ANY one thing for these monumental problems we’re witnessing. To do so is so simplistic and immature it makes me want to give you detention.

spendocrat,
all religions contain the seeds of fundamentalism, because they require unquestioning faith in the truth of their assertions. Thus, any one who disputes these assertions, is attacking the religion. Not until people demand reasonable proof of religious dogma, is there a hope of stopping fundamentalisits of every persuasion, from the Christian gay-hate murderers and abortion clinic bombers of the USA to the suicide bombers of the Middle East. Religion may not be the direct cause, but it is the fuel of discord.
Like sex, religion should only be practised between consenting adults in private.

"Wafa Sultan and Tawfik Hamid were two Muslims who have intimate knowledge about Islam. They are Arabs and are secular."

Wafa Sultan no longer regards herself as a Muslim. Further, Arabs (as in native Arabic speakers) make up around 15% of the Muslim population.

Philip, why don't you tell us about your background? I'm sure I could find some nasty and salacious dirt to throw your way. After all, few people here seem to be interested in the topic discussed in the article itself.

"Look around you Irfan, the signs are there already. How many Muslims do you know who are having significant doubts about the Hadith?"

Well, just about everyone. Because all Muslims know that there are all sorts of ahadith (plural of hadith) of all varying grades of authenticity. Because Islamic theology has placed a premium of recording and preserving all records. Including the forged ones.

Maybe if you sat down and studied the sciences of hadith, you would soon learn that there is no parallel to this degree of historiography in any major world faith.

You and others here might also sit down and study the processes by which rules are deduced from the texts. Then you would realise why I tend to ignore those here who love pulling out verses and texts which they cut and pasted from JihadWatch or some other fruitloop website.

Because, believe it or not, not every single verse of the Koran or saying of the Prophet Muhammad leads to an automatic ruling to be applied in Australia in 2007. Or indeed anywhere else.

I cannot stop some people here from believing the sharia is little more than a form of non-anaesthetic amputations. Just as I cannot force them to spend less time during working hours on this forum instead of doing real work.