AC thanks for helping me in my attempt to explain things and why they are not always what they appear or reported to be. I just read some of your link and am relieved to see that someone else see's things as I do. It is difficult trying to show someone something if they 'won't' see it. If I had tried to explain that things are never what they appear, I would have been shot down immediately. This link finally goes some way towards vindicating me. I am not a very patient researcher so thanks must go to those who do because with enough research, the truth shall be exposed. I would like to know of any thoughts or comments the others might have on this book.

You're welcome ALTRAV,
"I just read some of your link and am relieved to see that someone else see's things as I do"
I felt the exactly same way when reading it yesterday.
It's almost kind of uncanny.

All I can say is take what you've learned here and share it with everyone you know.

- And try not to make a fool of yourself in future.
You know you're going to get challenged, and if you're not on the ball you'll just make us all look silly.
I'll be happy to discuss more of the books contents with you, (I'm only halfway through atm though) but we might need to create a new thread for it.
It's not really proper etiquette to hijack other threads.

AC, carry on. Wait to hear any further info, as you say, maybe on another thread.

Alt Rav,

What's the difference between conspiracy crap and reality ? Evidence. Evidence which can be corroborated from a number of sources. Produce some or hold your peace.

Joe

Loudmouth, apparently there is no pleasing you. I come across a lot of info. Barely remember a fraction of it in detail. What I do is condense it into a sense of good or bad and variations there-of. I am not able to remember details. I have to leave that to younger minds. The other problem is that in reading different views on a topic, I find it is possible to end up with conflicting views. One either keeps digging or else has to make an informed decision based on what he has read. If there are conflicting views, which one is true? And so I rely on comparing the conflicting articles in an attempt to extract the truth. You know very well if you promote side A you will get challenges from those on side B claiming it is all a lie and a conspiracy and not factual and 'where's the proof'? If someone sets out to hide the truth then you will never find it. On the other hand if you know there is a chance of a cover-up then it makes it a lot easier to accept when everything 'sounds too good to be true'.

Been away for a few days.... Wow, 28 pages in this discussion....

Foxy, you say that some people read the Quran, translated or not, and don’t understand it because they don’t know Arabic or it is badly translated, and because of this they misunderstand Islam and do bad things, or something.

Well, bad news, honey, the Quran itself says it is “easy to understand” and “Written in your own language”. If something that is perfect can’t be translated adequately then obviously Allah chose a piss poor language it use. She should have chose Hebrew, Greek or English, because I have never heard Christians or Jews use this excuse about their writings. In fact, I usually look at several Quranic translations when doing research and the variations between them are astounding. The fact is that in so many ways, the Quran is a contradictory, unstructured, illogical and confusing piece of prose. No wonder what Muslims do and say what they do. Oh yes, another thing that I have noticed is that each of the newer translation is “nicer”. The translators seem to be trying to make it less harsh and inane with each new version. There is nothing more common that Muslims taking a line or two from the Quran, editing it and then say they are quoting the Quran, even while they ignore six other verses that say the opposite. As I always say, Islam and logic, Islam and facts, don’t mix.