Let's discuss why Codell's signature is offensive...

Has none ......................?

1- "O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you, and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing" (Sura al-Tawba 9:123).

2- "Fight against those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger, have forbidden -- such men as practice not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book -- until they pay tribute out of hand and have been humbled" (Sura al-Tawba 9:29).

3- "The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;" (Sura Al Ma idah 5:33).

4- "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." (Sura AL-BAQARA 2:16) The Quran

 

Also,

Wasn't the Quran based upon pirates and plundering?

DD

 

The problem Mr. Clutch is that you are assuming that most muslims are arabs and that all arabs are muslims. It is quite the contrary. Though the middle east is not small in size, its population is minimal because of the terrain. The 'arabs' are a very small percentage of muslims in the world. Christianity in the arab people is quite prevalent, especially in Palestine. I know at one time Bethleham was almost 80% before 1948, then once it turned into a warzone, many left and not it is like 20% christian. I know that in Egypt, coptic christians are common and most Palestinians that I know here in the US are christian.

And statistically speaking, the number of suicide bombers in the world divided by the total muslim, arab, or arab-muslim population would be next to nothing. To infer an idea about a whole based on the actions by a few is just silly and I think that that would be equivalent to my examples because there are only around 20 million jews in the world versus well over a billion muslims, so each action by a jewish terrorist to create this assumption would be a statistical equivalent to 50 terrorist attacks. With Christianity and child molestation, it would be 2 muslim terrorists versus every christian child molestor.

So I can make the assumption that a Jew is more likely to be a terrorist and a Christian is more likely to molest a child then a muslim is to be a terrorist.



About Christian Arabs and their roles in the fight against Israel, which could make the quote change to :

All Christians want are hugs, just some want to hug you with dynamite! How funny..

Excerpt:

Christians in the "struggle"

"It cannot be denied that Israeli administration has been behind some Christians' decisions to leave. Even before the rebirth of the state of Israel, some Christian Arabs supported Muslims in opposing the Zionists. In The PLO, Julian Becker writes of that period: "Christians too were a dhimmi people [non-Muslim subject peoples, discriminated against on various levels], but they joined with the Muslims in opposing Zionism. The Jerusalem notables formed a Muslim-Christian Association for that very purpose, while similar organisations sprang up in Jaffa and other centres." (New York: St Martin's Press, 1984)

In the decades since, many Christian Arabs have thrown in their lot with their Muslim compatriots, becoming activists or terrorists in anti-Israeli movements. They include the leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, George Habash, and the leader of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Naif Hawatmeh. Both "rejectionist" organisations, based in Syria, oppose the Oslo Accords to this day.

The mainstream PLO/Fatah also has its share of ethnic Christians. Several clerics have also sympathised openly with the PLO (One Catholic priest, Hilarion Capucci, was jailed in Israel in the 1970s for smuggling weapons for PLO terrorists.) In recent months, Israel has protested the Vatican's appointment of Pierre Mualem as Greek Catholic archbishop in the diocese of Akko, on the grounds of his alleged close ties to Capucci, to Syrian intelligence, and to PLO hard-liners who oppose the Oslo Accords (also see page 4). Yet despite these examples, Christians (and particularly the tiny evangelical minority within the "Christian" minority) have reportedly found more to fear from the growing Muslim extremism in the disputed territories, especially with the growth of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The Digest has published interviews with Christian Arabs bearing out this view, and reported widely on persecution experienced by Christians who have converted from Islam.

Christians in the self-rule areas, facing Islamic activists on one hand and a Palestinian regime not known for its democratic practices on the other, would be forgiven for feeling unwelcome and uneasy. "

 

If you don't do it you shouldn't be offended. It's not referring to you. I don't know why people get so pissy over jokes. Yes, I read most of this garbage posted, especially the garbage by MacBeth, talking about the Crusades back in a world where everyone killed everyone with no regard to rules....ridiculous comparison. It's the year 2003, the world is much more sophisticated....any group of people...including radical Muslims....should be harrassed if they go around killing people for no reason. If you are too insecure not to take a god damn joke then you can go talk to a wall for the rest of your life.

 

And if you are to insecure to engage in a good debate then maybe you should be the one talking to a wall.

 

I agree very much with you in that the PC garbage is just silly and always worrying about everyone else's 'feelings' is something that I'm not going to worry about. But statements like codell's signature honestly just show either the bias in the media or the ignorance of people in this country.

If I see something that I feel is wrong, I will say so. I believe that is the opposite of extreme political correctness. I'm sure the popular thing is to say.....Go Troops! Kill those damn evil Iraqi's!! And those moslem terrorists!!.....But i'm willing to get my information about the world from more than the evening news.

 

Talking about the Crusades just isn't being realistic. The world has changed leaps and bounds since then, for the better, of course. A "good debate" should never center around a harmless joke. I'm half black, Italian, catholic, and I am from New Jersey. Make up as many jokes as you can about any of them, and I won't be offended....I have no reason to. I'm not going to go ape**** about a harmless joke that doesn't pertain to me. There are bad people in every culture, poking fun at the bad ones shouldn't be considered heresy.

 

For the record, I didn't have a problem with the signature, but I can understand the point of view of people who do. If a muslim said that he or she was offended by the signature, I would find that easy to understand. I agree that a lot of this thread has gotten off track, but I don't think this can be put off as a simple harmless joke. I'm sure Codell has nothing against Muslims in general, but when I saw first read his signature I had to think about it, and that was long before this thread was started. So its a point worth debating, but again yes this thread has taken some wierd turns.

 

Khan, I'm not trying to be hair-splitting. But your argument hinges to some degree on the subtle shift of your statistical referents. Suicide bombers are a small fraction of the terrorist population, not to mention the suicide bombers who actually got into action are in turn a fraction of all the intended suicide bombers. I have no idea what the proportions are. But I figured you'd have to factor that in your calculation.

 

So many things wrong with this post, I don't know where to begin...oh, I know.

Someone made the comment that more people have been killed in the name of Christ than in the name of Allah...and Mad max asked if that was hostorically numerically accurate...hence the relevence of the Crusades. Notice the tense there...past...as in historically...If you are so lacking in the ability to discern where and how a topic veers onto a certain avenue of exchange that you feel the need to criticize that avenue without even understanding it's function or purpose, then I agree a wall is a better alternative for intelligent debate than your worhty self.

Also...just for discussion...re: the wondeful modern world we live in which has no relevence on the savage times of the Crusades. You are right...there is no comparison. The bloodiest century in recorded history is hands down the one we just passed, the 20th. More people were killed in wars in the 20th century, in fact, than in any other 6 centuries put together. More people were killed in either of the World Wars than all the Crusades put together...So if you want to keep the idea in your head that we are so evolved that the beligerence of the Crusade period just doesn't compare with the sophisitication of today, then once again, I would introduce you to a wall, you two should have a lot in common. History is the study of the past, with the intent on learning lessons which serve today...I'm not saying you should study history, but for God's sake at least know what you're talking about before you bash people for doing it themselves.

 

Good points...will have to re-read my version; which do you have? ( trans.) Doesn't alter my point re: Old vs. New, but effectively refutes that one aspect, ie 'none', if it is accurate. ( Not doubting, just haven't seen the passages you are quoting myself.)

 

Dude, you can't steal his bit about the wall. That is just messed up!

 

I understand that, and I still believe its way more sophisticated and peaceful now than it was then BECAUSE of these major wars. The wars in the 20th century were necessary, they were out of defense of a few crazy people that thought they could take over other places. You see, if this was back then, those countries would still be considered part of Germany, Japan, etc. Instead, other countries helped them regain their land. The Crusades were for no discernable reason, as are these little jihads happening now. I understand the world will always have wars, but I don't think any of them will be on a large scale. The wars in the past century established enough rules and guidelines that countries are just simply scared ****less of the prospect of even taking over weak countries for the sole reason of gained power.


Its just a completely different world now. I don't think we'll ever agree though.

 

Just a few thoughts:

How many suicide bombers have there been that were not Muslim in the last twenty years? I'm betting there were few Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, or Jewish suicide bombers.

What does Oklahoma City have to do with suicide bombers?

How many conflicts since the post Cold War world started to take shape center around Muslims rather than Christianity/Buddists/Hindu etc. Islam is at the center of more than any other major religion. That would seem to be more relevant than the Crusades.

 

Anyone remember why the Great War was 'necessary'?

I can't either.

 

Just curious, is that total number killed, or as a percentage of population? There were a lot more people in the world in the 20th century than ever before.

 

Man. 1st thread ever that has my name in the title and you guys are hijacking it by talking about the crusades? This is about me damnit!!

*paging BGM with his "Shut It Down" picture*

 

Ok, so you remember that Simpsons episode where Homer had to find his soulmate ....? No? Well, then, maybe that Seinfeld where George had to cover a fib with a bigger one? How about that Office Space quote? ... So, who's your favorite band?

Oh right, we split the forums.

 

Define what would be counted as done in the name of Christianity. A rough estimate of the total numbers would be appreciated.

 

Its not like youve never hijacked a thread before. Actually I am saving my crusade stuff till we get a more interesting thread.