Pericles,

From the tenor of your post time stamped Friday, 18 December 2009 10:51:33 AM I thought you were advocating censorship of "dangerous words".

I was mistaken and I apologise.

My favourite charity is the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne. Feel free to donate as much as you like.

Grateful, Philip Tang

Here is a link to the Encyclopaedia Britannica article on the Ottoman conquest of Serbia:

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/654691/Serbia/43571/Conquest-by-the-Turks#ref=ref477239

The article states specifically that no attempt was made to convert the conquered people by the sword. However:

--Non-Muslims were taxed more heavily than Muslims; and

--There was a periodic conscription of Christian boys who were removed from their families and taken to Constantinople. Some of them were conscripted into the Janissaries.

See:

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_janissaries.html

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janissary

In other words the Christians appear to have suffered LOST GENERATIONS for many centuries under Ottoman rule.

Grateful,

Doubtless you will come up with horrors that Christians perpetrated against Muslims. As I said above, deciding which of the two superstitions, Islam or Christianity, is the more frightful is a tough call.

But keep at it all you good Christians and Muslims and may the best superstition win. ;-)

I have been asking those who make charges against Islam or provide their own interpretations of the scripture to provide proper supporting scholarship and so i'm pleased Stevenlmeyer has done so in regard to the charge that Islam was forced upon the Kosovians.

Broadly, you'll find that the general consensus among scholars of Islam (all non-Muslim) is that Islam was not spread by the sword. People can look up, for example, John L Esposito (editor of Oxford History of Islam) or Prof Thomas W Arnold's classic "The Spread of Islam in the World: A History of Peaceful Preaching"

Wikipaedia is a useful starting point for those who want to undertake their own investigation and of it confirms what i have said regarding the scholarly consensus:

[\QUOTE]Although Islamic history has been studied extensively, the early years of expansions and their nature has remained a poorly studied field in relation to its social, historical, affective or psychological aspects according to some historians.[2] The conceptualization is dominated by two stereotypes; the first popularized and captured by Gibbon in the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire is of a fanatical Arab horseman riding forth from the desert with a sword in one hand and the Qur'an in the other offering victims a choice between one of the two,[3] however such "old notions of forced conversions have been abandoned, at least in scholarly literature."[2] The other image is one of an interfaith, interracial utopia where different races and peoples lived together in harmony. This has also been discredited for more shaded and complex views[3], such as an acculturation of Arab-Islamic social norms and language,[4] or a process of dialog between the monotheistic Arabs during the Muslim conquests with other faith traditions.[5][\ENDQUOTE]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_Islam#Balkans
1/2

grateful,

It is unfortunate that Pericles and a few in OLO think that the opposite of Islam is Christianity. This is only partly true, one should follow the parameters stipulated in Islamic theology i.e. the world is divided into ‘Dar al-Islam’ (House of Islam - where Islamic law predominates) and ‘Dar al-harb’ (House of War - the rest of the world). It is incumbent on ‘Dar al-Islam’ to fight and conquer ‘Dar al-harb’ and permanently assimilate it. http://www.whatthewestneedstoknow.com/about_the_project.asp

Not surprisingly, down the centuries Muslims all over the world are fighting non-Muslims; this is consistent with Islamic theology and is documented in http://www.historyofjihad.com/

“Would you like to begin by nominating serious scholars and historians that we can use?” (grateful)

The people qualified to speak about Islam are Muslims who have suffered under the tyranny of this totalitarian ideology e.g. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Magdi Allam,Mithal Al-Alusi ,Shaker Al-Nabulsi ,Nonie Darwish Afshin Ellian ,Tawfik Hamid ,Shahriar Kabir, Hasan Mahmud ,Wafa Sultan ,Amir Taheri ,Ibn Warraq, Manda Zand Ervin,Banafsheh, Zand-Bonazzi.

They are academically qualified and take Islam very seriously (much more seriously than Western scholars), most of them have left Islam and don’t have a religion. They came together to found the Institution for the Secularization of Islamic Society. http://www.centerforinquiry.net/isis/islamic_viewpoints/the_silent_holocaust_why_humanity_must_achieve_victory_over_islam

Grateful

Please do not quote me out of context.

There appears to have been little to no forced conversion of kafirs by the sword as in "convert of die".

However, as I pointed out, the position of kafirs in Muslim dominated societies has not been a happy one. Stealing Christian boys is not exactly benign governance.

The HORRORS of life under and near Islam are well documented in "The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims" by Andrew Bostom. See:

http://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Jihad-Islamic-Holy-Non-Muslims/dp/1591026024/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261205091&sr=1-2

Even today the position of kafirs in Dar-ul-Islam is not a happy one. I would not have the freedom to propagate Christianity or atheism in Dar-ul-Islam the way you have the freedom to propagate Islam here.

Historically I am not sure which superstition, Islam or Christianity, has inflicted more misery on humanity. As I said in previous posts, it's a tough call.

This much I do know. The world would be a better place if all superstitions were to vanish.

Finally grateful,

Be under no illusion about me. I consider Islam to be a loathsome superstition and I feel nothing but contempt for those, such as yourself, who attempt to propagate it.

--I respect your right to be a Muslim.

--I respect your right to attempt to propagate Islam.

--I would not seek to curtail your civil liberties in any way on the basis of your creed.

BUT

I do not respect you or your disgusting superstition.

Stevenlmeyer,

Based on wikipaedia Andrew Bostom appears to be a doctor in medicine who is not proficient enough in Arabic to translate the documents he has interpreted:

[\QUOTE]
Andrew Bostom is the author of The Legacy of Jihad, a work which provides an analysis of Jihad based on an exegesis of translations of Islamic primary sources done by other polemicists on the topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_G._Bostom
[\UNQUOTE]

In addition, this brief wikipaedia bio makes no mention of him publishing in peer reviewed journals. I then went to an academic search engine, Web of Science, but found nothing: it appears he has not sought, or at least has not been accepted, for publication in any journal let alone a peer review scholarly journal in Islamic studies.

The only related publication i could find was a review of Bostoms book, The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, by Wolfgang G Schwanitz. Middle East Policy. Washington: Fall 2007. Vol. 14, Iss. 3.

The reviewer is scathing of his lack of scholarship concerning a so called “1915 Ottoman Fatwa” which turns out to be a product of German and Turkish propagandists designed to incite insurgency against the Allies in WW1. Apparently, the document doesn’t even look like a fatwa with the typical Q&A format (see sunnipath.com for examples). The review is rather long so i’ll only be able to post excerpts. I don’t mind sending the whole document if you can show me how.

So, instead of directing your contempt at myself, my religion and my Prophet it would be more appropriate to direct it towards Bostom and his hate-driven ilk. For a better idea about the character of this person look at the people he mixes with and supports: http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/09/andrew-bostom-takes-on-mike-kruse-loses/....i presume you are not one of them.

Bostom has also appeared on FoxNews as a commentator which says a lot about FoxNews a credible source of information.

By the way, you did not address my question concerning the scholarly support for your view that the Prophet was a "psychopath".

Btw, i am with you 100% on the Janissaries.

salaams

“...i'm pleased Stevenlmeyer has done so...” (grateful, on scholars)

“I find quite extraordinary is that many of these scholars are in fact Western apologists, are in fact Christians; Christian scholars like Montgomery Watt who wrote the famous two-volume biography of the prophet, highly regarded in the Muslim world...

the Egyptian intellectual Hussein Amin, wrote a scathing review of Montgomery Watt... ‘I prefer the old Christian missionaries who at least were honest enough about their Christianity and who wanted to convert Muslims to Christianity, than to these Western apologists [scholars] who are just totally dishonest in that way.’

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/isis/islam_in_the_world (The Religion Report, ABC)

“Patricia Crone and Ibn Rawandi have remarked that Western scholarship lost its critical attitude toward the sources of the origins of Islam around the time of the First World War. Many Western scholars of the 1940s were committed Christians, such as Montgomery Watt, who saw a great danger in the rise of Communism in the Islamic world and thus welcomed any resurgence of Islam. They were insufficiently critical of the Islamic, Arabic sources. John Wansbrough has noted that the Qur'an "as a document susceptible of analysis by the instruments and techniques of Biblical criticism . . . is virtually unknown."

http://www.islam-watch.org/IbnWarraq/KoranCriticism.htm (The need for Koranic Criticism by Ibn Warraq)

Sad to say, grateful, the Western scholars on Islam are really Islamic apologists. Many of them are in universities funded by Saudi money.

Evidence for Mohammad being a psychopath.

“Psychopathy is a personality disorder whose hallmark is a lack of empathy. Robert Hare, a researcher in the field describes psychopaths as "intraspecies predators who use charm, manipulation, intimidation, sex and violence[ to control others and to satisfy their own needs. Lacking in conscience and empathy, they take what they want and do as they please, violating social norms and expectations without guilt or remorse".(Wikipedia)

“Understanding Muhammad: A Psychobiography of Allah's Prophet”, by Ali Sina proves beyond doubt he is a psychopath, e.g. marrying his daughter-in-law.

Most surprising is all Muslims hold him up to be the example of a perfect man!!
http://www.felibri.com/content/understanding-muhammad-psychobiography-allahs-prophet