What has any of that really got to do with living a life of Spiritually informed intelligence and clarity in 2008?

And besides which "fasting" for 12 hours and then pigging out in all sorts of gross ways as soon as 6 PM occurs is no spiritually purifying discipline at all.

There was an article in the paper the other day which pointed out that many Western Muslims have turned the Ramadan period into exactly such a pigging out occasion.

A real fast means abstaining from all food except purifying fruit and vegetable juices and herbal teas for how ever long the fast is under taken (3-7-10-30 days). And also refraining from gross entertainments and unnecessary worldly activities too.

One should go to the temple or holy place and chant, pray, and read or listen to recitations of the Sacred texts. And of course abstain from sexual activity.

Fasting and prayer was the old calling and practice.

This is a fair but very abreviated story of Mohammad's conquests. If you read the ahadith and early Islamic writings you find raid after raid, murder after murder, plunder, enslavement, rape, torture and even wife beating by Mohammmd and his companhions. These things are clear and they were written by Mohammad's friends and followers, not his enemies.

These stories and the hate and violence in the Quran tell you all you need to know about Islam.

Is Ramadan sacred to Muslims? Let me see... On September 6th, two suicide bombers killed over 50 people in Peshawar, Pakistan. On September 13th, five bombs killed over 30 in New Delhi, India. On September 15th, a female suicide bomber blew herself up at a Ramadan fast breaking ceremony killing 22 people in Diyala, Iraq. On September 17th, a truck bomb and some militants attacked the US embassy in San'a, Yemen killing 16 people and on September 20th a massive truck bomb killed over 60 people in Islamabad, Pakistan, and so on... Muslims killing Muslims (mostly) during Ramadan and all in the name of Allah for the glory of Islam. But this is not anything special. Mohammad himself attacked and burnt mosques (oh yes, Allah gave him special permission to do so!). In fact, a person (Muslim) would have to be blind not to notice something very suspicious about Islam.
http://www.kactuzkid.com/suspicious.html

Do these things bother Muslims? Do they care? Not at all! They refuse to be honest about their own dogma, writings and history. The future will not be nice because Muslims are either deceitful or in denial and we and our leaders are blind. This is a recipe for disaster.

Kactuz

Well I'm tempted to say 'nothing' about this article or issue, and perhaps I shall.. becuase most of what needed to be said..has been.. to some 'ad nauseum'... but perhaps there are others who joined OLO more recently.

Maybe it's best to let the article itself speak..after all, it is written by a Muslim is it not?

<<In late 623, angry Muhammad started denouncing many of the Jewish customs he had adopted and ordered assassinations of those critics and poets who mocked his creed.>>

<<Meanwhile, Muhammad took about six months to build an abode for his community. Once he was firmly footed in Medina with many converts, it was time to take revenge against the Meccans for their rejection of his faith.>>

<<Many of Muhammad’s followers were unwilling to support his violent mission. Allah quickly came to his support revealing a series of verses (Quran 2:190-194, 2:216), commanding Muslims to fight even if they do not like it:>>

I'll refrain from adding to this, but I will provide something else by way of contrast from the founder of the 'other' major world religion which is usually seen as 'the competition'....

"I am the good Shepherd, the good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep"

"I am the resurrection and the life, he who believes in me shall live, even though he dies"

"I am the bread of life, he who comes to me will never go hungry, he who believes in me will never be thirsty"

Readers may draw their own conclusions. Amen.

The message behind Ramadan is noble. Identifying with the poor and their plight through prayer and fasting.

However, Muslims must do much more to make the Islamic ideology acceptable to non-Muslims. They must allow for Muslims who want to leave Islam without fearing for their lives. They have to live up to the part of the Koran which says that “there is no compulsion in religion”. Mohammad was acting like a prophet during the pre-Medina days. But after tasting victory in warfare and assuming leadership position, he behaved like all human beings who have absolute power, greedy and corrupt.

Progressive Muslims must therefore only accept those parts of the Koran that deals with Mohammad during the pre-Medina events.

Islam today is much like the Roman Catholic Church before the 16th century reformation. There were religious policemen going round to enforce “religion” and claimed to be the spokesman for God on earth. Rituals consisting of a long list of “dos and don’ts” kept people in the dark, poor and superstitious.

Well.... I stand amazed. Where is Pericles to be all over this author like his worst ever rash for writing a piece which could be described as rather damaging for the image of Islam which Pericles seems constantly protect?

Could it possibly be that when a Christian criticizes Islam he is a person in need of a stern rebuke, (by Pericles of course) but when a Muslim himself shows that my own criticisms are valid....... then...... aaaah.. I think I get it Pericles.

I smell....now what is that odour?

You are starting to sound desperate, Boaz. Not a good look at all.

>>Well.... I stand amazed. Where is Pericles to be all over this author like his worst ever rash for writing a piece which could be described as rather damaging for the image of Islam which Pericles seems constantly protect?<<

You should be perfectly well aware by now Boaz, that I have absolutely no interest in "protecting" any religion, whether yours or anybody else's.

The fact that I have to take you to task, frequently, for stirring up fear and loathing against Islam and Muslims in general, does not remotely mean that I am a defender of that religion. It simply means that I detest people who use religion as a weapon against others who do not share their beliefs.

Why I have to keep explaining this to you is utterly beyond belief.

Except, of course, that you know exactly what is going on here, and you can't stand the idea that I am not taking up the cudgels in this particular instance.

As I said, it is not a good look.

To the article in question here, I have absolutely no opinion, since it does not seem to threaten anyone.

I am more concerned with Muslim Terrorists fire bombing peoples houses in London because their mullahs tell them to because of someone is publishing a book.

as for

"How Ramadan and Eid became sacred Muslim rituals"

I would not give a rats

Australia is not a muslim country and before anyone starts to preach the mantra of Islam, they should first separate their belief from those who act contrary to the acceptance of free speech historically enshrined in Australias values by denouncing the terrorists and their mullahs.

'The first Ramadan and Eid were very significant events that shaped the future of the great Islamic faith. Success in this incredible battle against a much larger opposition gave Muslims tremendous confidence and a feeling that God was on their side.'

I'm not sure how a battle where men kill each other can be linked to the term 'sacred'. Surely, the fact that Islam was born in death and violence affirms the fact that it is NOT sacred - by definition.

A truly sacred ideology would spread without the need for 'the sword', but instead would attact people by a gentle presention of clear and rational truth. Secular Humanism springs to mind.

Pericles....

what you are totally missing.. probably willfully is that this article was written by a Muslim... and it simply outlines the very reasons that I myself am critical of it (Islam).

<<To the article in question here, I have absolutely no opinion, since it does not seem to threaten anyone.>>

I'll guarantee such an honest article scares Fellow Human.. because he is always defending 'peaceful' Islam.. where I am exposing it's violent underbelly.. just as this author has clearly explained.

You might recall that in the "Islam Watch Exposes" thread.. I made statements about the beginnings of Islam. You criticize me.. FH also calls it 'propoganda'... yet here..when a MUSLIM writes the same thing.. *silence*..... where it should be....

"Oh yes.. Polycarp.. now we see exactly what you are driving at because now we hear/read it from a Muslim"

It should be most obvious Pericles that IF the 2 most important rituals in the Islamic calender are celebrations of violence against non Muslims... it goes without saying WHAT the Muslims are in fact celebrating...and..how this will translate into attitudes toward non Muslims.

Well.. it does if psychology has any meaning these days.

All I've said all along is that "Islam" is aggressive and violent by doctrine.

This article supports that contention.
Atheists like Paul L and others can identify this clearly and easily,

but you? errrr.. well u'd make an interesting subject for clinical pshychology for sure, but your criticisms are aimed at both
-the Atheist Paul L and
-the Christian,- me

yet NOT at the Muslim....this author :) most curious indeed.

So let me ask you.. from your reading of this article
1/ Have I misrepresented Islam? If so..how?
2/ Has this author misrepresented Islam?

It is very, very simple, Boaz.

>>but you? errrr.. well u'd make an interesting subject for clinical pshychology for sure, but your criticisms are aimed at both -the Atheist Paul L and -the Christian,- me yet NOT at the Muslim....this author :) most curious indeed.<<

The only reason that I take issue with you, Boaz (and I have lost count of the number of times I have had to explain this to you) is that you do not pass up a single opportunity to foment hatred against Islam and Muslims. You seize upon every little scrap you can find, and tease it out into the Great Conspiracy. If you had your way, every citizen in this country would be baying for the head of every Muslim, courtesy of your constant denigration of them and their religious beliefs.

This article does not articulate a single threat to you, your person, your family, your religion or your country. Yet you couldn't resist the opportunity for a snide remark, together with a suggestion that somehow it proves what you have been saying all along - which, of course, it does no such thing, since is not in any way belligerent.

Nor does it articulate a single threat to me, my person, my family, or my country As a result, I cannot find a single reason to criticise it.

The fact that it is of no interest to me on any other level, either historically or spiritually, only reinforces my indifference.

You clearly feel threatened, Boaz, every time you see or hear a Muslim, or read anything written by a Muslim. You somehow see it as important that you not only share this fear with us, but that you instil it in as many people as you can.

This is particularly evident here, as a) you eventually couldn't refrain from dropping your little dose of poison into the thread, and b) you also felt the need to include me in the discussion.

Sad, really.

yes Pericles..it is very simple, as you say.

I've been saying all along that Islam contains teaching and commands, (not suggestions) to impose it's rule on non Muslims. That is clear from the Quran which means it is not a temporary or occasional thing, but a world view.

The article here clearly demonstrates that Mohammad did exactly as the Quran commanded (which of course he invented for the very purpose of establishing his own personal stamp on history).

So.. we have a number things

1/ The Quran commands
2/ Mohammad did.
3/ Islam is today as it was then, because for it not to be so, would be a denial of both it's holy book and it's founder.
4/ That many, even most nominal Muslims do not seek overtly to establish this rule of Islam is a historical reality at this time.
5/ That there are among them a significant number who do.. is also a present fact of life.
6/ Finally this article shows all of the above.

You are still seeing my position through a very carefully calibrated filter which only allows for the word 'hate' to slip through.
You seem to refuse to accomodate 'information' of a more general nature which is useful to the community in knowing those things which drive Islam historically and now in the form of terrorism.

If you see no threat in the celebration of violent aggression, then I suppose Anzac day means very little to you, as it celebrates the courage of young men sacrificed in war.
When young Aussies remember Australia day..they remember certain things.
I don't see how you cannot be concerned about the celebration of the destruction of the enemies of Islam... as you are one. (by simply not being one)

So long as you are in denial, Boaz, I will be here.

>>I've been saying all along that Islam contains teaching and commands, (not suggestions) to impose it's rule on non Muslims. That is clear from the Quran which means it is not a temporary or occasional thing, but a world view.<<

You have also been "saying all along" that your attacks on Islam are not attacks on Muslims.

How do you reconcile these two positions?

You invariably take great care to tell us that Muslims have no choice, but to follow Islam and be committed to the destruction of non-Muslims...

>>I don't see how you cannot be concerned about the celebration of the destruction of the enemies of Islam... as you are one. (by simply not being one)<<

Yet you also try to deny that these attacks relate to individual Muslims.

You cannot have it both ways, Boaz.

You are a committed rabble-rouser, fostering fear and loathing in your gullible flock.

You cannot hide behind the pretence that you are attacking the message but not the individual, when you spend so much energy on linking the two through the highly selective sound-bites you isolate from their scriptures.

In your quiet and reflective moments, Boaz, if you have any, perhaps you should ask yourself where your fear comes from.

Is it personal, in the sense that you fear for your life in the face of ravening hordes of scimitar-waving Muslims?

Or is it a different form of fear, one that says, in a very quiet voice, hey, maybe I'm wrong to denigrate another religion the way I do.

After all, they at least are believers, and believe in God just the same way as I do.

Not like those horrid atheists.

Dear Pericles... you said:

<<How do you reconcile these two positions?>>

Those positions of course being:

1/ Exposing Islam

2/ Not condemning Muslims.

I generally distinguish between the nominal cultural Muslim and the radical and assert that the Radical is the one following the letter of the Quran.

You, on the other hand, like to tell us that what Christians did during such adventures as the Crusades tells us about Christianity.

So, your criticism of me, stems from this consistent approach of not being able in your own mind to differentiate between the nominal and the radical of either faiths.

Now..just because you cannot see any difference between criticising a faith system, and criticizing "all" it's adherents, does not mean it is impossible to do.

I would welcome criticism of Christianity, and engage with such critics... I have nothing to be afraid of, embarrased about, or in dire need of rationalization. Such is not the case with Islam as a religion (using it's Quran and Hadith and early History (Sunnah)as the determinant.

In this article.. it is clear that what I've been saying about Islam, is reflected in the words of the Muslim author.. (you might need to re-read it) So..what more is there to say.. "I was right" :)

Much as you are loathe to admit this, the evidence speaks for itself.

You say you don't find anything threatening in the article?

<<In late 623, angry Muhammad started denouncing many of the Jewish customs he had adopted and ordered assassinations of those critics and poets who mocked his creed.>>

If you couple this with RMIT Islamic society's claim:

"Indeed in the Messenger of Allah you have an excellent example to follow for whoever hopes in Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much."
Qur'an 33:21

Oh wait...that is the QURAN's claim about him.

Soooo....let me see if I've got this.

1/ MOhammad is a great example.
2/ He assasinated those who mocked him.

and you don't find any threat ? :) you better join Larry, Curley and Moe as the 4 stooges old son.

Shame on you Boaz, you are slicker than a .... really really slick thing (apologies to Baldrick).

>>I generally distinguish between the nominal cultural Muslim and the radical and assert that the Radical is the one following the letter of the Quran.<<

And you then go out of your way to point out that all Muslims must, by definition, be radical, because they are bound to follow the letter of the Qur'an.

>>I've been saying all along that Islam contains teaching and commands, (not suggestions) to impose it's rule on non Muslims. That is clear from the Quran which means it is not a temporary or occasional thing, but a world view.<<

You specifically describe them as "commands, not suggestions"

What is this supposed to mean, except that i) Islam says do this, ii) because it is in the Qur'an and iii) Muslims must obey, otherwise they are not Muslims.

You very frequently point out to anyone who will listen that the backsliders of your own religion cannot be called Christians, because they do not obey the rules that Jesus laid down. In fact, that is how you excuse kiddy-fiddling priests, is it not?

So if a) Christians are those who follow Jesus and the teachings of the Bible and b) Muslims are those who follow Mohammad and the teachings of the Qur'an, how can you avoid the obvious conclusion that your remarks are aimed at every practising Muslim?

>>You, on the other hand, like to tell us that what Christians did during such adventures as the Crusades tells us about Christianity.<<

It is true that I tend you use the Crusades as an example, specifically in order to mimic your logic.

If you insist on branding Muslims with the deeds of every Islamic terrorist, it is only fair to brand every Christian with the Jerusalem massacre of 1099.

Good for both goose and gander, Boaz.

If you were to be honest with yourself, you would admit that all of this ranting is just the venting of your hatred for a religion you dislike, because it is not your own.