Does not compute, Boaz. And you know it.

You can bleat all you like about ancient texts saying what you want them to say.

But if I want to know how a watch works, I go to a watchmaker.

I don't refer to ancient texts that describe water clocks, or those candles with stripes on. I don't study the intricate carpentry of a Swiss cuckoo clock, or the engineering of Big Ben's internals.

I go to a watchmaker.

If it is mechanical, I will talk to Patek Philippe, or Vacheron and Constantin. If it is advice on mass production of digital movements, I'd go to Casio.

Similarly, if I want to know what contemporary Muslims think about terrorism, I would not search through ancient texts. Nor would I ask the terrorists themselves – I already know what they think.

Nor – and this is important, so I hope you still have your listening ears primed and ready...

I wouldn't consult a Christian evangelist.

As far as I am concerned, your outburst says more about you, your character, and your understanding of Christianity, than it does about Mumbai terrorists.

>>The Ultimate Spin. "People who committed this heinous crime cannot be called Muslim. Islam does not permit this sort of barbaric crime." COMMENT absolute, utter, unadulterated, RUBBISH!<<

These insults of yours, Boaz – and the above is a direct accusation of mendacity against an individual – are nothing but noise and hot air.

Pure, unmitigated, soap-box rabble-rousing.

And I'm sorry, but weasel-worded redefinitions of “what you mean” cannot hide the reality.

>>I said "Christian + Terrorist" is an oxymoron. Let me hasten to add "IN PRINCIPLE".<<

“In principle”, Boaz?

Your principles, I'm afraid, lie in tatters around you, as you desperately try to spin your way out.

You blatantly, shamelessly and with malice aforethought attempt to justify the most arrant double standards.

One rule for Boaz, and another for the rest of the world.

If you ever had any credibility, I'm afraid that this latest outburst - coupled with your barbaric attitude towards torture - it is now just a memory.

Now dear Pericles.. precious as your articulate responses are.....

you said:

"Similarly, if I want to know what contemporary Muslims think about terrorism, I would not search through ancient texts."

aaah... at this point you should have stopped, thought, and gone in a polemical direction rather than an ad hominem.

You SHOULD have said: "I goto respected commentators about Islam, and seek their opinion"

You would of course not goto current respected commentators who simply fit your profile of "inclusiveness and western minority demographic status" ..no..you would consult those to whom most modern Muslims appeal for final arbitration.

-The 4 major schools of Islamic jurisprudence.
-Paramount commentators/historians like Ibn Kathir. (who Muslims will name as "the Mt Everest of commentators" ie.. high and lifted up.

Then, you would find that my opinions and observations are in complete harmony with their views.

You see..where you go wrong, is you:

a) Look at things from a secular viewpoint.
b) Don't seem to consider that 'most western Muslims' are a demographic minority and tone things down for western audience consumption.

But... in spite of the personal attacks on me.. I appreciate the diversity of opinion.. after all.. how can truth be recognized unless it has a backdrop of falsehood.. like personal attacks :)

Good old Irfan. Never one to resist jumping to a conclusion.

Strangely enough the Indian authorities still haven't determined the facts. But let's not wait for that shall we Irfan?

Instead, riffle through your pile of well worn racist/religious pap articles and change a few words and Bingo! Another accurate piece of dog excrement to publish!.

I note you didn't include atheists or dope smokers in the groups of terrorists. Good. The former wouldn't follow such religiously insane dogma and the latter would spend months planning it and forgetting it each day thus never getting there. I'm with these 2 grups.

Not Irfan. He's an urger. Sits on the sidelines and invents hatred. Good on your Irf. Reliable and regular. Like a good laxarive.

Sorry, Boaz, but playing the ad hominem card doesn't earn you any points here, given your track record.

>>aaah... at this point you should have stopped, thought, and gone in a polemical direction rather than an ad hominem. You SHOULD have said: "I goto respected commentators about Islam, and seek their opinion"<<

No, that's what you do, Boaz, not me.

I listen to real people, who have a respect for their fellow humans.

Not a bunch of religious closed minds, who can only think in terms of theological argument. Angels on the heads of pins, and all that.

You would like to believe - and indeed have us all believe - that we should live in fear and trembling of Muslims. You regularly mount your soapbox, and spout your doom-laden analyses of this text, or that interpretation.

To me, your arguments simply form a closed loop. Everything is self-referential.

It says this in the book, so it must be so.

Or not so, if it says something contradictory to your belief.

None of this has relevance to the real world, that real people have to live in.

Which is why I listen to people with goodness and - yes - love in their hearts, rather than those who can only think in terms of conflict and hatred.

So, when someone says that Christianity is about loving your neighbour, and forgiveness, and charity, I listen.

Equally, when someone says categorically of Mumbai's violence that "Islam does not permit this sort of barbaric crime", I listen.

Because if religion is to mean anything positive in this world, these are the words that need to be out there, front and centre.

Of course, if your idea of religion is to encourage violence, confrontation and the elimination of all opposition, that's your prerogative.

And your practice also, it would appear.

To me, Boaz, your views on religion are very much part of the problem, and will never be part of a solution.

And if that's ad hominem, so be it.

Well said, Pericles.

Let me ask you this question, boaz:

Do you believe that it is impossible for muslims to become decent, non-violent, loving people?

Is it possible for them to have an interpretation of their religion that does not permit violence?

And for the love of logic, don't give me the koranic/biblical rubbish. I know you're primed to say that if they're 'true' muslim followers, they must be violent.
We're discussing the here and now, a simple yes or no will suffice. There is no 'right' answer, only your opinion.

Do you think it's possible for them to make a non-violent interpretation?

Also bear in mind, that if you do say that "if they do, they're not following the qu'ran," you're effectively saying no just picking a fight, because such a thing is an insult - just as when people say you're not Christian for inciting hatred. How do you feel when non-christians say that huh? Tend to dismiss them, because you think they don't really understand the foundation of your belief?

If your answer is "yes, it's possible" then I'd ask, what your end-goal, on a global scale is.

As pericles says, you're not encouraging the moderates, you're fanning the division, thereby making it impossible for moderates to increase in influence.
Thus, you make a world with everlasting conflict the only possible outcome, unless Islam is eradicated - an alternative which I'd say is just as heinous as the dogma of the fundamentalist Islamic preacher.

There is a third way - you can endorse moderacy instead of ridiculing and playing down its significance. You don't even have to give up your jihad against fundamentalist Islam.

But that's not your end goal at all, now is it? Admit it - you're aiming for the destruction of Islam, not peaceful integration. Not because you say it's impossible, but because in your words and actions, you make it so.
It clearly is 'possible' for muslims to be non-violent and accepting, but you won't accept that.

As someone said once, "Moral Equivalence Alert" !!

Typical of the Islamist apologist, Irfan.

I'm sure there are a lot of decent Muslims out there, who just want to make a living like anyone else.

Unfortunately their toxic faith has not had a reformation, and so they will suffer until they can bring themselves to overcome the extremists in their ranks.