Bin Laden Urges Americans to Convert

Man, who would've thought Bush was Hitler.

Who would've thought this topic would go down that road so fast?

Matt @ 1.2

The "Hitler" thingy is a panic response, induced by the sudden realization that the anti-war movement and OBL may have the same speech writer.

We have a Bush fanboy telling me about "panic" responses. Right.
Go ahead and follow up about how Saddam was going to eat our babies.

ridiculous. everyone knows that OBL is a wholly owned subsidiary of the u.s. intelligence community.

Go ahead and follow up about how Saddam was going to eat our babies.

Sure, right after I'm done watching that video about how the CIA/FBI/AA blew up Building 7 of the WTC. I never tire of that visual unicorn.

Only if you take what your enemy says at face value.

How dare you equate peace-loving americans with terrorists. Shame.

How dare you pretend you read the comment thread before getting all hot and bothered.

@IAmEverydayPeople

Peace-loving?

I think Bush is as much Hitler as democrats are Osama. I went ahead and played along with Bill Harrison's witty remark*, but peace loving Americans?

I don't know where to begin with that. You can decide on what side of the of issue you may stand but no one should be under any delusion that the most powerful nation this world is by any means, "peace-loving".

This nation wasn't founded on peace loving. This nation didn't achieve greatness on peace loving. And this nation isn't failing now because its "peace loving".

* There are nuanced details there though because Bush is a propagandist like Hitler and Osama is playing along with Democratic party ideals really as a means of provoking on our nation.

mr. slipper:

since when is it okay to say "@!$%# you" on these pages.... ? you exhibit and embody typical hostile, angry and dimwitted Neo-Con behaviour.

epiphany sorbet said...
"Sure, right after I'm done watching that video about how the CIA/FBI/AA blew up Building 7 of the WTC. I never tire of that visual unicorn."

You may wish to watch this one-minute clip (or not, the choice is everyones to see the reality of the world we live in or not):

youtube (dot) com/watch?v=C3E-26oVIIs

vladimer kerchenkomr.

slipper:

since when is it okay to say "@!$%# you" on these pages.... ? you exhibit and embody typical hostile, angry and dimwitted Neo-Con behaviour

@vlad:

A slipper the tongue....I'm sure.

Are you seriously going to buy this garbage? you SERIOUSLY think that a multimillionaire who's entire family are capitalists is anti-capitalism? if you really buy that, I am sad.

This is more propaganda and it's carefully constructed to get just the reaction it did get from you.

Here is some food for thought on Bush, the Bin Ladens, Carlisle Group and all the money to be made off of war.

I knew bin Laden was a Democrat when he endorsed Kerry in 2004.

Yeah, b/c it's not like he might use reverse psychology or anything. He WANTS bush in office. This war is the best thing to ever happen to his cause. It is making his ranks swell.

Coloring hid graying beard seems to be a sign that he feels he is getting old and life is passing him by.

It looks like a cheap Halloween beard. He needs a stylist.

Osama's appearance may be his attempt to demonstrate that he, and not Old Knobby, is still in charge. Some in al Qaida have chafed against the Egyptian's arrogance. Definitely, the whacked character is a camera hog in comparison.

My comment was in response to the guy who said 'Who would've thought Bush was Hitler.' My apologies for the insult, but people who say things like that really get under my skin.

Word has it that he's been doing a lot of online dating.

Dang so that where he has been spending all his time recently ! Looks like a hot site :-)

A mark of desperation. Is Osama trying to look good for the ladies? His former sister-in-law sez he's afraid of the ladies. Said he waved his hands in the air when she opened the door . . . and wasn't veiled.

He's taken a leaf out of John Edward's book.

Word has it that he's been doing a lot of online dating.

Nah! with his kidney chi, no lady will get a rise out of him.

I'm with you on that, you can't force someone to convert

What a revelation...

Atheist for life.

lol

I'm with e.c. on this. I live in a country that so far allows me to live in peace with my neighbors as an agnostic. OBL can go pack sand and worship the tooth fairy for all I care.

You better believe this hits very close to home. If you try to force Christianity or Islam down my throat, then you are no better than OBL or Anne Coulter.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

powerclam:

What "various groups" would that be?

Well that's only if you let him dictate terms.

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

Ann Coulter

You can't take Ann Coulter seriously...she's a psycho beyond belief.

I love the whole Michael Moore thing with his dream, when he said his biggest nightmare ever was when he was talking to his future granddaughter when he's older, and his granddaughter looks exactly like a child Ann Coulter.

She is a fantic just like Osama; that's the point.

What "various groups" would that be?

Let's see...
We can start with the Socialist Workers' Party. the International Workers of the World, Code Pink...

pc:

Well, I haven't seen Code Pink call fpr negotiations with bin Laden. They do street theater,

How many seats do the SWP and IWW hold in Congress?

powerclam, is the religious right any better? basically, they say that we are to blame and that we could stop bin laden by behaving better (read: morally, as in their twisted idea of morality). Just like bin laden, the religious right has gone on record saying that we are being attacked for our morals and values. which basically means the religious right wants us to be more like muslims in our dress and actions, so that we can stop the attacks.

do you approve of changing our beliefs and practices at the demand of bin laden, as the religious right does? do you also blame our "western values", which include capitalism, by the way, for being at fault?

Dude, its already out there.

"JI - hot"!!

Bill

A simple "NSFW" would be nice.

ROFLMAO! JI-HOT!

It is amazing how sexy covering the face is for westerners when added to the nudity that has become commonplace here. Great photo.

I feel bad for those coincidental converting just now. Poor timing.

Pushing religion....family values...covering up the women...spending a lot of time with men ?.................pro creationism....probably anti abortion....anti drug an alcohol.....devoted to fighting "terrorism" [Bush style]

Geez- OBL's no Liberal Democrat-

He sounds like the Republican candidates -

You oughta stop by the hardware store and get a smaller brush t' paint folks.

gpnavonod
Pushing religion....family values...covering up the women...spending a lot of time with men ?.................pro creationism....probably anti abortion....anti drug an alcohol.....devoted to fighting "terrorism" [Bush style]

You oughta stop by the hardware store and get a smaller" brush t' paint folks. "

@roads

ain't paint'n no folk-
but I does knows a Party platform won I sees one.
An I paints it .....the colors an brushsrokes... they tells me.
Sure do....
Ain't no crime in that......

Problem is you've got paint spatters.

Poor old Bin Ladin, what a schmuck. Seems he's been out in the sun too long. Bill makes the cogent observation he sounds a lot like a Democrat.

Karl Rove put him up to this!

Yeah Blaise but one must be a stickler on the details of one's jihadiana. The first offer of convert or die was made by that Orange Co. jihadi.

Gadahn, another bearded schmuck. I dunno, maybe this Germany thing was his next plot, and it went sideways. So here comes a vidi-idi-o to talk to Americans. That whole Germany thing smells like something Al Q would be dreaming up, trying to hit us where we wouldn't expect it. CONUS is risky business these days, so why not try a strike on American military in Germany, just like the good old days of the disco bombings?

Well, let's hope so. As a resident of the prime target area I'd like to keep a relationship with my ass going for a few more years. Honestly though I cannot believe there hasn't been a hit here on the Metro. Security's pretty lax from what I can see. Hell, the damn lazy schmucks who empty the blast-proof trash cans have taken to leaving the lids up in Farragut West.

"that's the same offer made to the Knights Templar at the Horns of Hattin, before Saladin beheaded them."

An Pizarro gave the same offer to the king of the Incas- slow strangulation-or Christianity-
They [Islam] haven't got a "lock" on cruelty.

That's a very good, and very chilling, point.

Of course Pizarro's comment was made over half a millenium ago.

That's the same offer made to the Knights Templar at the Horns of Hattin, before Saladin beheaded them. Bin Ladin doesn't want to convert us, he's fulfilling the Islamic part of the bargain before he hits us again.

An Pizarro gave the same offer to the king of the Incas- slow strangulation-or Christianity-

Bill Harrison:

Of course Pizarro's comment was made over half a millennium ago.

An Saladin's comment almost a whole millennium.

The truth is, neither party had intended to spare their prisoners,so the conversion part was just a formality.No?
The other difference would be -
That Saladin seized an executed a foreign intruder-
Pizarro, an intruder, extorted hostage treasure, then seized an executed his Inca host.

But all in good sportsmanship-.................

It does not matter. The Mexicans have a song, the degüello, ths song of no-quarter. My was, and remains, these sorts of offers are more than merely formalities, the are the killer justifying himself not only to his victim, but to those who witness his act.

@Blaise

Yes, I agree
They are a farce.
An they are used ....as a justification... for doing what you intended -

One of the definitions of "embrace" is : a close affectionate and protective acceptance; "his willing embrace of new ideas";

Something Osama bin Laden does and his good buddies do every day right?

I don't think OBL is Republican. heh.

Aine:

Sure he is. He's trying to appeal to American with phnoy promises of tax cuts.

One of the definitions of "embrace" is :

i really wouldn't do the Mirriam-Webster dance too vigorously...
Recall that his definition of "Peace" is "submission to the will of Allah."

Aine MacDermotI don't think OBL is Republican. heh.

2!#12.2 - Fri Sep
You missed this-

Pushing religion....family values...covering up the women...spending a lot of time with men ?.......curbing freedom of expression..........pro creationism....probably anti abortion....anti drug an alcohol.....devoted to fighting "terrorism" [Bush style]

Geez- OBL's no Liberal Democrat-

He sounds like the Republican candidates -

0!#10.
[only difference is.... he's probably not a hypocrite]

WAIT-could you find 72 virgins in a Catholic Church???

No, but you might be able to find a 72 year old virgin there.

71... if you [RETLAW] count yourself.
We're not counting sheep here....

By all means, explain why you think Islam is a religion of peace.

Gladly, I think that Islam, when practiced truthfully, is a religion of peace for many people. I have known many Muslims who exemplified this by the dignified ways in which they carried their lives.

One could say I'm making the "true Scotsman" argument about Islam and "Muslims," but ultimately each of us should be 'judged by the content of our character and not (insert relious belief system, ethnicity, gender here).' So, for the millions of Muslims out there who you don't see on the news, who are just trying to 'get by in the world,' trying to 'provide for their families,' etc, I am going to speak up and defend them.

Who in the world wants war? Who wants poverty? Who wants environmental degradation? Who wants vast inequity of wealth and resources? Who wants to perpetuate unjust systems of control?

Certainly there are some "Muslims" out there who wish to be the "controllers," but the same could be said about "politicians," "Christians," "Jews," "atheists," etc.

You may be interested in going and checking out a movie called "Blood of My Brother."

ytmnd

By all means, explain why you think Islam is a religion of peace.

Can you tell us why it is not a religion of peace?

And maybe you can get a Native American to tell you why Christianity is not a religion of peace...

Many others far smarter and eloquent than I have elucidated their reasons for why Islam is not a religion of peace, and this video and this article provide a satisfactory introduction to both Islam and the Islam that gives rise to these "radicals" the world over.

In short: The prophet Mohammed, upon whose "revelations" and example make up the religion of Islam, was a prolific warlord who slaughtered thousands on his way to becoming the ruler of Arabia. Fundamentalists like Usama Bin Laden simply believe themselves to be following the example of this prophet.

"was a prolific warlord who slaughtered thousands "

Like the christians did during the crusades? face it; both christianity and islam are major problems in the world today.

ytmnd

All three [Christian,Judaism,an Islam] have blood on their hands. Haven't you read the old testament?
[The difference is the [number slain] in ratio to the [number of adherents] divided by the opportunities to get what you want in G-d's name.[ Whatever your calling Him ]

YTMND wrote:
"Many others far smarter and eloquent than I have elucidated their reasons for why Islam is not a religion of peace, and this video and this article provide a satisfactory introduction to both Islam and the Islam that gives rise to these "radicals" the world over.

In short: The prophet Mohammed, upon whose "revelations" and example make up the religion of Islam, was a prolific warlord who slaughtered thousands on his way to becoming the ruler of Arabia. Fundamentalists like Usama Bin Laden simply believe themselves to be following the example of this prophet. "

---
I went to the video link and couldn't bear to sit through it. Sorry, I have a personal distaste for intolerance spewed through the mass media. Wasn't that the same guy who suggested 'strategic assassinations' should be employed to further our "peaceful mission of bringing democracy to the world?" So you sent me a link to a video out out by a guy who is calling another religion a violent one, when the hypocrite is calling for violence.

The second link, with the article, at least it addresses the multiple definitions of "jihad." You may be interested in looking into the definition of imperialism. Look at the British empire in India for example. Lets say you live in Country X, which had Resource Y in abundance, and Country Z wanted that Resource Y, but were too selfish to trade for it. So, Country Z invades your Country X. Would you sit by and be happy about it? Would you defend your country? This is obviously stripped down and way oversimplified, but no nation wants to be invaded, correct?

biggerthebetter, gpnavonod:

Yes, I've read the God Delusion, the End of Faith, God is not Great, etc. I'm well aware of the violent histories of the world's major religions, thank you. The crusades were a long overdue response to Islamic imperialism which in just 400 years had conquered nearly two thirds of Christendom. Unlike Islamic jihad, the crusades were not justified by the teachings of the gospel or the New Testament as a whole.

Why does any discussion of the violence inherent in Islam inevitably bring out the apologists with "B-b-but Christians also have a violent history!"? I think I have an idea: because they know so little about Islam that they can only fall back on their knowledge of Christian history.

electricblanket: Great ad hominem tu quoque, I assume the interviewer is Pat Robertson? I know what imperialism is as well, though I'm a bit confused at what this has to do with Islam. Is this in reference to Islamic imperialism?

electricblanket has already seen this, but for those who haven't, it's worth reading: A Warmonger's Guide to Interpreting the Bible by Matthew Brennan.

I have personally known plenty of Muslims who, by their actions and their words, help me believe Islam is a religion of peace. If you feel otherwise, tell me, how many Muslims do you personally know that practice a religion of hatred?

If the answer is "none", I suggest you carefully examine the stereotype that you are using to deride an entire religion. Part of the problem with this country today is the fact that too many people, liberal and conservative alike, are all too ready to base their opinions on talking points and rhetoric being shoved down their throats in the media, rather than expending the energy to gain experience and base their opinions on that experience.

ytmnd: atl east in the past Islam allowed people to convert; the early Jews just practiced genocide .

Exactly, Dennis. People are people. I've known a few fundamentalist Christians as well, and yet not one of them is willing to pick up a rifle and plink off an abortion doc. All this B.S. about "Islam is a religion of hate" and "Christians are just as bad" is just that - B.S.

I have to wonder if the concept of "labeling" will begin to take effect - or if it already has. For example, if you take a sane person and put them in an institution and label them with a psychiatric disorder, unknowing docs will start to pick up on behavior that reinforces the "diagnosis". Is it the same with Islam in mainstream media? And is it already too late for the west to correct this?

The terrorists - and the abortion doc murderers - deserve the harshest penalties, but let's not condemn all Muslims and Christians for the atrocities of a few.

clearcache: Where did I mention individual Muslims? There's no question that the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful. Muslims are probably even less likely to take up jihad than Christians are to "turn the other cheek". But that's not to say that the religion itself teaches peace and non-violence.

chindi: Conquered Jews and Christians (people of the book) were generally given three choices: Convert, live the subjugated life of the Dhimmi or be killed.

chindi: Conquered Jews and Christians (people of the book) were generally given three choices: Convert, live the subjugated life of the Dhimmi or be killed.

Right: Christians did not give that option and in the early days the Jews just killed them all.

ytmnd, by making statements about an entire religion, you are making statements about every single individual who is a member of that religion.

Let's assume you're a white male - I do not know if you are (I am) - if I make a statement like "white males are womanizing predators who seek dominance over female colleagues in the workplace", am I speaking the truth about you? I don't think so, and I'm certainly not characterizing myself accurately.

That's the problem - we're too obsessed with simple tags that we can use to label people like "muslim," "terrorist," etc, rather than making the effort to understand the issue, understand the differences between violent and non-violent muslims, and work towards addressing the issues that stand in the way of peace. It is not as simple as the prevailing reductionist viewpoint describes. As long as we continue down this path, we will only heighten the tensions that exist between our peoples.

ytmnd, by making statements about an entire religion, you are making statements about every single individual who is a member of that religion.

By that logic, if I make the statement that Christianity forbids adultery, does that mean no Christians have committed adultery? If I make the statement that Islam is not a religion of peace, does that mean no Muslims are peaceful? Of course not.

For your information, it is possible to criticize a religion without painting it's adherents with the same brush stroke.

That's faulty logic - they are not equivalent statements. Christianity certainly forbids adultery, and some Christians commit adultery, an un-Christian act. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you're stating that Islam is a violent relgion, making violence in the name of religion an inherently Muslim quality. That's what is inaccurate, in my opinion.

And no, I do not think it's possible to criticize a religion without painting its adherents with the same brush stroke. You're somehow missing the definition of the word "adherent".

You don't have a problem if Muslims criticize their faith, do you? A lotta clerics certainly do have that problem, along with their followers. Let's not lose sight of that.

I don't have a problem if anyone criticizes any faith - however it's one thing to criticize faith and another to indict all followers of that faith based on a false stereotype.

And Muslims certainly aren't the only ones to be intolerant of a different opinion. Is it not considered sinful to disagree with the pope? He recently came out and made the statement that unless a sacrament is performed by a Roman Catholic or Orthodox priest, it really isn't a Christian sacrament - essentially rendering baptisms, marriages, etc of millions of Christians across the world null and void in the Catholic Church's eyes.

That infuriates me as much as intolerance in any religion, however I would certainly never claim that all Roman Catholics believe or act in that manner.

I don't have a problem if anyone criticizes any faith - however it's one thing to criticize faith and another to indict all followers of that faith based on a false stereotype.

And when have I done that?

And Muslims certainly aren't the only ones to be intolerant of a different opinion. Is it not considered sinful to disagree with the pope?

Not that I'm aware of. Is there so much as a mention of a Pope in the Bible?

That infuriates me as much as intolerance in any religion, however I would certainly never claim that all Roman Catholics believe or act in that manner.

Neither would I, nor have I regarding Muslims.

When have you done that?

Many others far smarter and eloquent than I have elucidated their reasons for why Islam is not a religion of peace

Looks like an indictment of the entire faith ... and indictment that you're fully on board with. If I read that wrong, I apologize.

Islam is not a religion of peace. It has a developed doctrine, theology and legal system that mandates warfare against unbelievers. The Prophet Mohammed personally led at least 27 raids and battles to establish the hegemony of Islam, remarking "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'". In keeping with such, one of the very last revelations received by Mohammed was the so-called "verse of the sword" which says to "slay the idolaters wherever ye find them" unless they convert to Islam. This verse, and those like it, are considered by many Muslim scholars to abrogate over 100 verses advocating peace. Of course, we can be very thankful that many Muslims have either ignored or contextualized these teachings, essentially reforming the faith, but we're only fooling ourselves by pretending these elements which give rise to violence simply don't exist.

Sounds just like the Christians in the Crusades, so what's your point?

"Unlike Islamic jihad, the crusades were not justified by the teachings of the gospel or the New Testament as a whole."

Muslim moderates have called for a reformation on fundamentalism.

I disagree with your statement that "Islam is not a religion of peace." I think it is safe to say that we will not be convincing each other if the others' opinion. I will state that my stance will allow me to potentially befriend a lot more people of the world, particularly if you were to tell every Muslim you might meet that opinion. I don't go around telling the intolerant Christian fundamentalists that I think that their intolerance betrays the core message of their faith.

We should also be thankful many Christians and Jews have re-evaluated what is socially acceptable rather than following dogmatic rules written in a book or series of books. Of course we've only done it to a point. Our "Christian" leaders here in the US have given' carte blanche to make "suspected terrorists" disappear into 'black site prisons' in countries without any of those pesky 'human rights issues.' Oh, how civilized we are, let us force our "democracy" on the mongrels of the world. Oh wait, our CIA overthrew the Democracies of Iran and Iraq, then put the Baathists and Saddam in power. Oh, how wise we in the enlightened west are. Our "Christianity" and "Judaism" haven't gotten in the way of these atrocities.

Shariah law has been developed by various Islamic scholars throughout the ages. The legal systems in most countries have been written by big businessmen and politicians over the years. None of these systems are working. Look at America. So many prisoners. The laws aren't working. Threat of punishment isn't working.

Also, "Allah" is just the Arabic word for God--the same monotheistic God Christians and Jews worship or claim to worship. Also, Muslims accept the Divinity of Jesus and his message. When a Muslim prays or fasts, what part of that is the "violent" part?

You want to know why Christians are always apologizing for the Crusades, the Inquisition, whatever? Probably because such behavior is considered un-Christian.

I will state that my stance will allow me to potentially befriend a lot more people of the world, particularly if you were to tell every Muslim you might meet that opinion.

Do you know me? When have I ever done this?

I don't go around telling the intolerant Christian fundamentalists that I think that their intolerance betrays the core message of their faith.

I agree with you here. I'm not a Christian. But when I have done this?

We should also be thankful many Christians and Jews have re-evaluated what is socially acceptable rather than following dogmatic rules written in a book or series of books. Of course we've only done it to a point. Our "Christian" leaders here in the US have given' carte blanche to make "suspected terrorists" disappear into 'black site prisons' in countries without any of those pesky 'human rights issues.' Oh, how civilized we are, let us force our "democracy" on the mongrels of the world. Oh wait, our CIA overthrew the Democracies of Iran and Iraq, then put the Baathists and Saddam in power. Oh, how wise we in the enlightened west are. Our "Christianity" and "Judaism" haven't gotten in the way of these atrocities.

These are based on the teachings of Judaism or Christianity??

Also, "Allah" is just the Arabic word for God--the same monotheistic God Christians and Jews worship or claim to worship.

Yes, that's true, but I'm not sure why you mention this at all.

Also, Muslims accept the Divinity of Jesus and his message.

You claim Islam is a religion of peace, but know so little about Islam as to claim that Muslims accept the Divinity of Jesus and his message. They don't.

When a Muslim prays or fasts, what part of that is the "violent" part?

Once again, you apparently know so little about Islam as to imply that Islam is just about praying and fasting. Islam is more than just rites. Who is claiming that fasting and praying is violent?

Hmm, okay, lets see...No, I don't know you. You stated Islam is not a religion of peace on a public forum, which many Mulsims may well read. You may not worry about offending their sensablities, and that si fully within your right.

Reagarding the question about "based on Crhistianity or Judaism," if you look over at the article and watch the video here:

huffingtonpost (dot) com/max-blumenthal/rapture-ready-the-unauth_b_57826.html

then perhaps you will see that "Christians" and "Jews" intermingle their politics and religion very much the same as anyone. So, practically speaking, yes, these people are taking their religious interpretations and using them as justification for unjust wars and imperialistic agendas.

I mention that "Allah" is the same God because it makes all this Abrahamic-infighting all that much more absurd. All of these people are God's children (if you believe that sort of thing).

As for your argument that Muslims don't accept the Divinity of Jesus, you are incorrect. There is a semantic difference in that Muslims believe he was a Divine Prophet, and many Christians believe he was the "Son of God."

And, I agree, what does practical Islam (fasting and praying) have to do with violence?

Reagarding the question about "based on Crhistianity or Judaism," if you look over at the article and watch the video here:

huffingtonpost (dot) com/max-blumenthal/rapture-ready-the-unauth_b_57826.html

then perhaps you will see that "Christians" and "Jews" intermingle their politics and religion very much the same as anyone. So, practically speaking, yes, these people are taking their religious interpretations and using them as justification for unjust wars and imperialistic agendas.

Actually, I misinterpreted what you were saying, which is that Judeo-Christian beliefs haven't stopped people from committing atrocities. Now you seem to be claiming these atrocities are based on Revelations. Which is it?

I mention that "Allah" is the same God because it makes all this Abrahamic-infighting all that much more absurd. All of these people are God's children (if you believe that sort of thing).

On a technical basis, yes, they worship the same God, a God with three very different personalities.

As for your argument that Muslims don't accept the Divinity of Jesus, you are incorrect. There is a semantic difference in that Muslims believe he was a Divine Prophet, and many Christians believe he was the "Son of God."

You'd be hard pressed to find any Muslim who accepts the "Divinity of Jesus", an expression most everyone understands to mean that Jesus is God. And no, they do not believe in the "message" of the Biblical gospels. If you meant to imply that Muslims believe he was a prophet, why not just say so?

And, I agree, what does practical Islam (fasting and praying) have to do with violence?

I don't know, you brought it up.

well, we could go in circles, but I'd rather not waste my time.

I will say that if you asked just about any Muslim, they would talk of the Divine Prophet Jesus (if you asked them to talk about and engage you on the subject of Jesus). I don't agree that "most everyone understands 'divinity' to mean Jesus is God."

Beside that, we are left where we started.

I'm not convinced that OBL was even the mand behind the 9/11 attacks.

911review (dot) com/articles/usamah/khilafah.html

I'm not even convinced that this lates video is 'real'

boomantribune (dot) com/?op=displaystory;sid=2007/9/9/61032/95401

So, again, we are debating something only somewhat relevant to the situation in the world today. The real question is: how did these corrupt people think that they could get away with staging such a huge hoax / false flag operation:

smokingmirrors.blogspot (dot) com/2007/08/dov-zakheim-and-missing-trillions_8010.html

Muslims believe he was a "Divine" Prophet

They do believe this-
"Divine" in this case is an adjective as in "G-d's Prophet".
Not "G-d the Prophet". That doesn't even make sense.

Geez !
Get the damn English grammer book on the table!

i think the distillation of the point that ytmnd made is simply:

• the central figure of christianity (jesus) lived a life a peace and sacrifice.
• the central figure of islam (muhammad) lead an army and conquered people.

whose example should we want the people of the world following?

sorry to reply to my own post, but i want to add that human nature itself should offer us more guidance than religion. i know that i should be kind to people around me because i need other humans to survive. and my life is more fun and joyful when i am happy and smiling and helping others do the same. so i don't need to read a book to tell me what to do. i can live the life i feel is right, and judge whether my actions help or hurt those people around me.

our intelligence should guide us. forcing people to agree with you at the edge of a sword or gun or bomb is dumb. why can't everyone coexist peacefully? we're all just humans. and if we believe in a higher power or not doesn't really change how we should act. it just so happens that good is good no matter what is telling you to do it. our own humanity should be our final test of any action we are about to take. people seem to forget this and would rather have someone else tell them how to live. i dunno why.

* the central figure of christianity (jesus) lived a life a peace and sacrifice.
* the central figure of islam (muhammad) lead an army and conquered people.

Hmmm, a myth vs a real person. A myth whose teachings no one follows and that spawned 2 millennia of oppression and violence vs a man whose teachings are pretty much ignored and who spawned a movement that saved unspeakably precious writings and artwork from the followers of the myth.

I don't know, I'm torn. Is "medicate anyone who follows any stupid religion" an option?

Yeah, I agree, the point really is whatever one's "religion" there is in my opinion any justification for any wars. Using religion as a basis to take the land from others is wrong. Using religion as the basis for attacking anyone is so hypocritical...

Its time to reconcile and figure out solutions, and you can't bomb solutions.

i'd take a role model of myth over a real person any day. i'm not saying jesus isn't real, i'm just saying why does it matter? we teach with fairy tales all the time. personally i'm trying to live up to batman :) what's wrong with that?

i'd take a role model of myth over a real person any day. i'm not saying jesus isn't real, i'm just saying why does it matter?

I don't know how to answer this. I guess having always been grounded in reality makes it difficult for me to have conversations with people who aren't familiar with it.

we teach with fairy tales all the time

Maybe YOU teach fairy tales all the time. My offspring will tell you, "She never lied to us about Santa Claus, the government or god." I'm serious. Ask my 21 yo. LOL

personally i'm trying to live up to batman :) what's wrong with that?

I would like to see more people try to emulate Superman . . . it would likely have a higher fatality rate . . .and win/win situation.

If you thought about what your saying ........

-it would be helpful.

Let's be fair. Anyone else sent arms there?

Why don't [sic] he convert to Christianity instead of telling us what religion we should convert too [sic]?

And that, my friend, is what's at the root of the problem here. Nobody can deal with people who are different from themselves. It creates too much independence of thought and free will. Everyone should conform to a single religion, a single line of thinking. Heck, while we're at it, why doesn't everyone learn a single langauge. Let's do away with both political parties - we really only need one. Let's all act and think exactly the same way. The world will be a much better place, then.

No, diversity is a strength, and we're one of the few countries in the world that encourages you to speak your mind and me to speak mine - you can have your opinion, and I can have mine - that's what makes America great.

But yeah, converting everyone to Christianity would certainly work too. Let's do that, I'm sure they'll welcome it with open arms. You get right on that. Let me know how you're received in Tehran. Also, let me know how you're received in downtown Newark. Heck, why don't you just start with the Newsvine community - that would be a much easier task. It's much smaller than the entire world.

backroads:
Let's be fair. Anyone else sent arms there?

1!#21.2 - Sat Sep 8, 2007 2:05 PM EDT

Yes -fair ....would be that the Soviets sent arms as well.... because the Anglo- French Canal Co. got the boot from the new Egyptian gov't. An the British Colonial Office... got it's ticket home to London.
Then they,[Anglo-French]..... along with the Americans,..... decided to punish Egypt for not playing ball
-in the "proper" fashion.

[Not content with the idea of Egyptian sovereignty over the canal they {AngloFrench},along with the Israeli's seized the Suez Canal again in 1956.]
Fair -is the result of checking all the facts to get at the reasons.

Unless you have another agenda,that is.

Remember that his definition of "peace" is "submission to Islam."
Do you really think his definitn of "embrace" includes what we call respect?

He didn't say become Muslim's but to respect Islam.

The normative use of the word "embrace" is significantly stronger than our word "respect." If I "embrace" a set of ideas, I'm not simply passively affirming them as an honorable way of life alternative. We can pretend to hear what we want to hear or we can hear what he really said.

Actual it can mean both in Arabic, translations often go wrong. Bin Laden is not a stupid man, he knows that the USA can not be converted to Islam, but he is asking USA to understand Islam, its laws and the culture, Bin Laden idea of Islam is based on the ancient way all the laws in the Koran being fully observed.

The ancient way is the base on which his fundamental ideas are based, I believe that he wants USA to respect ancient Islam.

It of course leads to good headlines Bin Laden Urges Americans to Convert, but no I think there has been a misunderstanding with the translation.

However it only a point, the other is BIn Laden is an evil son of a bitch, we should never make fun of this guy and listen to what he actual says, its important we don't underestimate this mans evil intelligence.

The normative use of the word "embrace" is significantly stronger than our word "respect." If I "embrace" a set of ideas, I'm not simply passively affirming them as an honorable way of life alternative. We can pretend to hear what we want to hear or we can hear what he really said.

EMBRACE:

3. To include as part of something broader. See Synonyms at include

There are many meanings to the word-
If you choose 1- over the others, than it signals a prejudged bias.

Which seems to be the case in a number of these posts.
But do "pretend" ...if you must.

Must laugh -- coloring your beard is really decadent 'n Western.

My sentiments exactly.