yep,like in Andalus,France and eastern Europe up to 1683?
Apparently you have never heard of the Ottoman Empire!
You Guys own that too,lock stock and Barrel!
Now,go and read the passages in the Koran that permit Islam to terrorize and kill the Kaffir!

(3) In Mecca, Muhammad had one wife. During his last ten years of his life at Medina, he married twelve more women.

(The poor family man of Mecca became the wealthy, voluptuous sheik with a harem of "wives" in Medina. Polygamy and harem culture debases women and makes men hedonistic and narcissistic. Societies that sanction polygamy, harems, and concubines have always assigned a low status to women.)

(The Medina Quran's heaven for men is a garden paradise where every male sensual pleasure is catered to by nubile nymphs--just as every sensual pleasure of Muhammad, as the voluptuous sheik of a harem, was indulged. The Medina Allah is a God for men. Goldmann says Muslim women have a hard time getting into paradise.)

(4) In Mecca, Muhammad fought against idol worship. In doing so, he exempted Christians and Jews from his proscriptions and persecutions and respected them as "people of the book." In Medina, he persecuted Christians and Jews as infidels.

(Christians and Jews in Islamic countries never know when they will be protected and respected or persecuted and reviled. The situation is often fluid so that protection can suddenly gives way to persecution. Historically, the best Christians and Jews can hope for under Muslim rule is second class citizenship and heavy taxes from which Muslims are exempt. When jihad and war lord sensibilities were in the air, Christians and Jews often faced forced conversion, banishment, slavery, sexual bondage, or death.)

Was Muhammad corrupted by power?

Was Muhammad corrupted by power in Medina? We do not know for sure, but it appears to be so. His exploitation of women by creating a harem of wives and his violent abuse of power in Medina was the very antithesis of his methods and behavior in Mecca. If the change in the Quranic verses resulted from Mohammed's changed character, then we can rule out Muhammad's claim that the contents of the Quran were dictated by the Angel Gabriel. If Muhammad lied about getting the verses from Gabriel, the changed verses were probably self-serving. Does that imply that Muhammad was a charlatan? Not necessarily. It's possible he was just self-deceived.

The hypnotic power by which Islam holds hundreds of millions of people in an enchanted thralldom is the profile of a cult, not a mere con-game. The spiritual powers of heretical cults emanate from diabolical sources. Muhammad may well have been deluded by the same dark powers as have bewitched his followers.

Unfortunately, Muhammad's changed behavior and teachings in Medina are a little too convenient and self-serving for anyone with a grain of skepticism about human nature to swallow. We are thereby compelled to face the possibility that Muhammad was corrupted in Medina by the lust for power, control, vengeance, fame, wealth, and women--and wrote the new verses of the Quran to rationalize his vices.

We can find the same venal motivations and self-serving manipulation of religion in many of the Muslim caliphs that followed Muhammad, and in the Muslim dictators of today. The corruption of Muslim officialdom in many lands seems to follow the pattern set by Mohammed when he was a corrupt war lord.

The Muslim quandary

How do Muslims decide whether to lean toward the peaceful or the jihadist verses? American Muslims tend to think for themselves on this issue, and generally lean towards the mild Meccan verses, even if their leaders disagree. Arabs in the Middle East have a tendency to follow the teachings of a mufti or mullah, or to follow what their family, clan, tribe, or community decides. If their clan or their mullah goes jihadist, they will probably follow them and become jihadist, at least in theory. Although Muslims in Arabic countries are less prone to independent thought than American Muslims, many appear to be secretly peaceful for pragmatic reasons, while publicly joining the jihadist chants to keep up appearances.

Some conservative Muslims refuse to go militant until they perceive a threat to the "ummah," or the Muslim community. However, Muslim teachers are not in agreement about what constitutes a "threat" and how the "ummah" is to be defined. Therefore, there is no formula by which one can predict who will go jihadist or who will moderate their views. As a result, Muslim leaders are capable of volatility in their policy and influence.

http://www.renewamerica.com/analyses/060630hutchison.htm

This proves your ignorance. You are delusional. Like i said, you need to check your facts before spreading hate. You clearly found these quotes on an anti- islamic website/ blog. In fact, every ignorant person i have encountered mentions these quotes. I implore you to study Islam the correct way.
These quotes have been taken out of context. They are not instructions for muslims to kill, it is explaining a battle. The battle of Badr. How about you read the other 99.99999999% of the Qur'an?

Volatility in policy

Some Muslim leaders in Europe recently pulled back from jihadist rhetoric to the surprise of Muslim scholars. When Muslims rioted over Danish cartoons that ridiculed Muhammad, many Europeans were disgusted and contemptuous of Islam. The loss of face connected with appearing ridiculous was unbearable to the European Muslims, and that is why some of their leaders backed off from jihadist propaganda. Muslims rioted because of ridicule and moderated their behavior because of the fear of more ridicule. No Westerner could have predicted either event. The contradictory nature of Islam allows for such volatility of policy.

The volatility of policy can be exploited by clever manipulators and deceivers. The slippery con man Yasser Arafat preached peace and moderation one day, jihad to the bitter end the next day, and terror bombings as a war of nerves on the third day. Sometimes, he would speak about peace in English and preach jihad in Arabic from the same podium.

How could a pathological liar like Arafat hang onto power so long? According to Goldmann, a lie is not a sin in Islam in the way it is in Christianity. Christians care deeply about whether a person believes what he is saying is true. Muslims mainly care about whether what one says is true. Whether or not one believes the statement he is making is a secondary question. This is especially true of the Medinian version of Islam in which there is a rift between the human heart and prescribed public actions.

The prevalence of lies in many Muslim communities sometimes makes Muslims easily deceived and prone to treachery. Muslim duplicity multiplies the difficulties of negotiating with them, trusting them, and understanding what they really think. Lies breed corruption, and the corruption of Muslim officialdom is a major barrier to democracy and to reform.
(from the same Article)

why should anyone believe pro-Islam Sites when Islam itself makes no Bones out of the fact that it is quite appropriate to lie to the Infidel?

Does Allah change his mind?

Do the verses written in Medina represent a new policy that overrides the verses written in Mecca? If this be the case, does Allah change his mind? Goldmann answers yes to both questions.

Christians believe in a God of steadfast principles and purposes. In contrast, a Muslim has no problem saying that Allah changes his mind. Goldmann has often heard Muslims say, "Allah can change his mind, because he is Allah and can do anything He wants."

Christians believe that God's laws, commands, revelations, and actions are expressions of his character and that God never acts in ways that are inconsistent with his character. Therefore, we can learn about God's character by studying and obeying his law and learning his truth. Furthermore, the universal moral law is written on men's hearts, so that the laws of God ring true in the human conscience.

Muslims generally believe that Allah is unknowable. He does not reveal his character to man, but only reveals his commands. According to the warlord version of Islam from Medina, Allah's commands express his arbitrary will and do not express a universal moral law that lines up with his character or with his nature. It is Allah's will that makes a thing right or wrong. One must learn by rote the things Allah declared by fiat to find out what is right or wrong. Reason and conscience are of no help in understanding arbitrary law that demands perfunctory obedience.

In contrast, Western man traditionally believed that the intrinsic quality of a thing in itself gives clues to its rightness or wrongness. Therefore, good and evil are not arbitrary, but have an objective quality.

Muhammad's conception that Allah makes arbitrary decrees implies that Allah as lawgiver is inconsistent with Allah as creator--or it implies that the creation does not follow an orderly design. Mohammad at Medina brought an element of irrationality and chaos into the cosmos by introducing the idea that his arbitrary moral law does not necessarily line up with the laws of nature. Arbitrary ruling by fiat must of necessity introduce irrationality into law. American liberal judges who practice arbitrary law share this legal aberration with Muhammad.

Muhammad's theology is illogical and self-contradictory--and that is why his law does not fit the natural law of the creation. Not only can we not learn about the design of nature by studying Allah's law, but we can learn nothing about Allah from his law.

After all, we should not expect to learn anything about a warlord (like Muhammad in Medina) by his decrees. The decrees are an exercise in raw power with no thought to justice. The warlord means to have his decrees obeyed and his power publicly honored. The very fact that his decrees are arbitrary yet obeyed demonstrates his sheer power more blatantly than if his decrees made sense. Allah, as the god of a warlord, inevitably has the same attitudes.

A warlord does not tolerate those who question his decrees. In like manner, Muslims are warned by their teachers that asking too many questions about why Allah commands something is a sign of impiety. If Allah changes his mind, it is not for man to understand or to question why, but simply to obey.

A parallel tradition in Islamic law is based upon Quranic verses written in Mecca. This alternative Islam views the laws of Allah as objects of divine harmony and splendor that delights the human heart and enlightens the mind. This second tradition is close to the Jewish view of God's law.

American universities often teach the Meccan face of Islamic law and are mute about the Medinian warlord version. Islam is a Janus mask of two faces. To teach about only one of the faces is to deceive the students.

http://www.renewamerica.com/analyses/060630hutchison.htm

"The "terrorists" are not the problem. They are the symptom of a much larger problem. The problem being oppression from the west."

If that is the case why are SO MANY Muslims migrating to west to escape the violence by REAL oppression.....the oppression by the likes of ISIS who will KILL them for not joining them and rape their women?

Ignorance prevails again
Who is this so called "Goldmann" to question allah & his holy book?
Of course god can change his mind. Did you think you were created by "the big bang" haha!?
Islam teaches that moses & jesus were prophets sent to teach the world about allah. To stop worshiping idols and unite all brotherhoods together.

anyone can/should question anything, including religious truths... wouldn't you rather know the real truth instead of what you've read in a book?

Yes, of course.
There is a fine difference between questioning to seek knowledge and questioning to contradict.

so,enlighten us Kaffirs then!
Can't?
Thought so!
so far all we have gotten is Denial and accusations of Ignorance!
The regular Fare!

Is Allah a person?

The Christian God is infinite and personal. By human standards, He is hyper-personal, because he is a Trinity of three persons united in one being. He reveals his personality to man through Jesus Christ, who is the second person of the Trinity incarnated as man. The central quality of eternal life for the Christian is knowing his personal God. "And this is life eternal, that they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." (A prayer of Jesus to the Father, John 17:3)

By contrast, the Allah of Medina is unknowable, and salvation has nothing to do with knowing him. The Muslim paradise is a garden filled with sensual pleasures for men and has nothing much to do with knowing Allah.

But is Allah a person? Goldmann says he is not. Keep in mind that Goldmann is leaning on the Medina version of the Quran, which is logical because of a Quranic teaching that later verses supercede earlier verses.

A warlord might think that Allah is a distant potentate, unknowable to his subjects. However, Muslims who concentrate on the Meccan verses might argue that Allah is a person. Muslim Sufi mystics have a very personal concept of Allah.

A Muslim consensus would probably come down in the middle. Allah is not impersonal in the sense of the impersonal divine oneness of pantheism. But he is not ultrapersonal like the Christian God. The Christian God primarily wants us to love him and have our obedience flowing into action from our love. Allah primarily wants us to obey him and loving him is a secondary question--if it is considered at all.

Muslim legalism

The four most important sources of Islamic law are: 1) the Quran; 2) the Hadith, or a collection of the words and works of Muhammad; 3) the ijma, or consensus of scholars--an ancient, standardized body of interpretation and doctrine; and 4) the Qiyas, or the reasoning of scholars about situations about which there are no concrete rules. Sometimes a fifth source, the consensus of the "ummah" or Muslim community, is included. Those determined to systematically follow sharia--that is, Islamic law--face a mountain of decrees and precepts from the four or five sources. The diligent Muslim can often find a guideline in this great mass of teachings to fit almost every situation in his life.

Some Muslims rigorously follow cookbook recipes from the law, concentrating scrupulously upon outward forms while they are indifferent to the inward spiritual condition. This is the pharisaic and the Medinian model. Other Muslims follow the Meccan model and are not far from the Jewish concept of God's law, and care about the moral and spiritual content of the law.

The Medinian Allah who is only interested in outward forms of the law is the Allah of Islamo-fascist regimes like the Taliban. This is the Allah described in Goldmann's book. The Meccan Allah who is merciful, and whose law is harmonious and beautiful is generally the Allah of American Muslims. In most places, Islam is a muddle, with a hodgepodge of Meccan and Medinian approaches to law. This is to be expected, because the Quran mingles the Meccan and Medinian portions indiscriminately.

http://www.renewamerica.com/analyses/060630hutchison.htm

The dismal legalism of Medina

Medinian legalism is followed lock-step by Islamo-fascist regimes like the Taliban. They have used Muslim legalism to produce the most cruel and dismal way of life imaginable. This path of misery is what they wish to impose on others by force. The ideal society of Muslim extremists is everyone else's hell.

The kind of legalism that Goldmann describes inevitably must lead to certain oppressive effects on the human condition:

(1) If one is to follow the mountain of edicts in sharia law, every conceivable word and deed must conform to some cookbook formula. If such a life is achievable--and it not clear that it is--one will increasingly resemble a programmed automaton with a frowning face. The dark jihadist glower comes from a life reduced to being a mere mechanism of arbitrary law. Such a one often responds with hatred toward those who manifest free and authentic life--for real life exposes the emptiness of what some would consider a living death. The only compensations for the life of sharia darkness are the delusions of self-righteousness, the illusions of control, and the superficial consolations of community solidarity. These three vicious deceptions nourish human cruelty.

(2) The commands of the Allah of Medina are arbitrary and disconnected from a universal moral law, or a natural law. The Medinian Muslim has no joy in obedience, unlike the Jew who delights in the laws of God because of the law reveals precious truth, delightful beauty, venerable justice, and moral magnificence. The Jew finds in the laws of God the universal moral law written in his heart. In contrast, the joyless obedience of the Medinian Muslim produces a heavy heart and a sense of futility.

(3) Obedience is a matter of routine, perfunctory outward cookbook conformity to rules, forms, and rites. The Medinian Muslim is not required to like these duties, or nourish goodness in his heart as he does them. He is not obliged to understand the spirit of the law or even agree with it. If he disagrees but obeys and keeps his mouth shut, he is acceptable to Allah.

Jesus was never more angry than in his denunciation of the pharisees for following the law in a tidy-minded cookbook fashion, while what was in their hearts contradicted the spirit of the law. The teachers of Medinian law teach precisely the approach that Jesus condemned.

(4) Allah gives no grace to help to man obey. The Muslim must somehow obey or despair and go to hell. In contrast, God responds to Christian faith by giving grace, which imparts the desire and power to do his will.

(5) Allah is merciful, but only to those who are, to some extent, keeping the law. In contrast, Christ's mercy comes upon a man when his faith awakens and he realizes that he has failed to keep God's laws and cannot save himself.

(6) The Allah of Medina is not interested in whether his followers love him or seek to become like him. After all, he is unknowable. He only cares if his followers publicly honor him and obey him. Such punctilious rendering of perfunctory honors exhausts and depresses the human spirit.

(7) The individual is trapped in the web of Kismet (fate) that from which there is no escape. This reduces the individual to a tiny cog in a monstrous machine.

(8) The concept of the fall and depravity of man is missing from Islam. Allah expects man to be good. This creates unreasonable expectations of what an individual can achieve on his own in following sharia law. These expectations put an unbearable pressure upon human beings who are not inherently good. In the heart of every devout Muslim is a powder keg created by this immense personal obligation. It comes as no surprise that Muslim history is pockmarked by sudden upheavals.

(9) The Arab Muslim community is filled with neighborhood spies and intense pressure to outwardly conform to the patterns of Islam. The claustrophobia of these crowded communities that are teeming with spies, lies, and suspicion is almost unimaginable to the Westerner who is preoccupied with personal freedom and privacy.


http://www.renewamerica.com/analyses/060630hutchison.htm

All but one of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi.

No western country has attacked Saudi Arabia. So there were no bombs dropped on their mothers, sisters, children when they slept at night.

The leaders were western educated living in Europe. They had nothing to lose?

Before 9-11 there was only once where WE were involved in a war in the ME and that was to save Muslims in Kuwait from being savaged by Iraqis.

So would you care to rethink your justification or will you just move on to play the Palestinian card.

I know that one is coming soon.

Don't forget the Yugo-Serbian conflict where we defended the Muslims from genocide.

so your stand is that he is lying about not knowing the customs,,,that someone else only alleges he doesnt know?


got it

Obama quotes:

#1 “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam”

#2 “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer”

#3 “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world — including in my own country.”

#4 “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam.”

#5 “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.”

#6 “Islam has always been part of America”

9/11 was not a terrorist attack. Impossible. It is impossible for a steel reinforced structure to collapse in on itself if there is a fire on the top floors
If bombs were dropped on Saudi Arabia, it would most likely result in a race war. That isnt in anyones best interests.

"Helping muslims" haha
George bush had a personal vendetta against sadam hussain, passed down by his father. Bush claimed that sadam was killing his own people, maybe he was. But who supplied the weapons in order to fight iraq? George bush did. Sadam hossein was excecuted on Eid day, out of all days.
Then bush claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Many years after the invasion no WMDs have been found?!

Instead, bush & his partner in this, Tony blair have multi million pound oil deals in Iraq.

Damn bullies.
Over 100 nations have been attacked by America.

Its not only muslims that oppose this "imperialism" Was Hugo Chavez a muslim? Was Fidel Castro a muslim?
The word terrorist is just a label, depending on who the nemesis is at the time.

Was Building 7 terrorism?
Was nanothermite terrorism?
Diego Garcia was terrorism,
I am conscious the Contras was terrorism,
Phosphorous that burns hands – that is terrorism,
Irgun and Stern Gang that was terrorism,
What they did in Hiroshima was terrorism,
What they did in Fallujah was terrorism,
Mandela ANC – that was terrorism,
Jerry Adams IRA – that was terrorism,
Eric Prince black water – it was terrorism,
Oklahoma, McVeigh – that was terrorism

I am glad we established that you are a conspiracy theorist.

Your answer regarding Saudi Arabia is comical.

I never once typed the word terrorist or terrorism in my post.

The bottom line is you have no real answers to my question. You just regurgitate the sympathizers talking points.