Can We Coexist?

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Re: Muslim leaders condemn terrorism

i don't know how to say it any better except the problem exists with this kind of interpretation of islam

You already have said that there are dangers or problems with our understanding of Islam, but you're not answering my counter question - please show me how my understanding of Islam is dangerous and/or problematic. You keep saying the problem is why my interpretation or the understanding we promote here (which btw to clarify is to simply follow Islam according to the Qur'an and Prophetic teachings), but when I ask you for evidence you resort to referencing individuals who's actions have been condemned by the Muslim majority.

That's as good as if I were to say "we can't live peacefully with westerners because there is a problem with their mentality" and then when asked to support my claim I quote bigots who have said that Mecca should be bombed (and there are many hateful non-muslims who have said this). Does this prove my claim? No, it only shows there are some violent people, not that peace with any westeners is impossible or even difficult.

i respect other people's religions and consider it a pre-condition for peaceful co-existence.

Okay, that's good and I agree.

can we agree that rightly or wrongly, this type of interpretation exists and even on this forum?

This isn't an interpretation, this is ignorance of Islam's teachings and when I see this on the forum I correct such people, whether publicly or privately. And in response to panatella such occurances are rare, and the people always admit their mistake.

one more time:
apostates should be killed.
blasphemers should be killed.
the cartoonists should be killed.
homosexuals should be killed.

I already told you that you are misquoting Islamic legislation and using it support your conclusion. Muslims are not and should not be implementing Hadd punishments in non-muslim countries, so this is hardly a reason to claim that there can be no peaceful coexistence. And you have misquoted all of these laws; I provided the links earlier explaining them in context. All punishments in an Islamic state are only for the protection and preservation of society; if you want to discuss that further we can do so in another thread.

if there was a growing number of nazis in my country i would be very alarmed. the analogy you gave doesn't make sense because you are combining past and present. also, frankly, i have no desire to co-exist with nazis and believe it is not possible so i wouldn't waste my time. obviously i don't view islam in the same category at all
if there were a number of crusader type christians running around, i would also be worried. (actually i am quite alarmed about the rise of the christian right and its influence on american policy, but that's another subject.)

So if you agree that Nazis do not prove anything about coexistence with germans and that crusaders do not prove anything about coexistence with Christians, then why don't you likewise acknowledge that the criminal actions of a minority of Muslims do not prove antyhing about coexistence with Muslims? Obviously the people who we cannot coexist with is the criminal minority, so you should say that instead of saying that you cannot coexist with the majority of Muslims.

i have not come to the conclusion that we can't exist - i am just on my way and i don't want to make this conclusion. i do think co-existence is impossible with this type of mentality or interpretation of islam.

I have the 'mentality' and the 'interpretation of Islam' that you keep blaming. And yet I live in a non-muslim country coexisting peacefully with non-muslim neighbors. Therefore, your conclusion that is impossible is baseless. And there are millions more Muslims living in non-muslim countries coexisting peacefully.

i consider it vital to see if this gap can be bridged before it is too late.

But you're breaking the bridge yourself. You misquote Hudud punishments and use them as an excuse to conclude that it is impossible for Muslims to coexist peacefully with Non-muslims. You highlight the actions of a crminal minority and conclude from that, that peaceful coexistence is impossible.

that's the problem. it is not a "figment of the imagination"

There are NO Muslims implementing hadd punishments in non-muslim countries - you can cite a few random criminals here and there but that's the same as if I cited a non-muslim murderer to conclude that the mentality of westerners makes peaceful coexistence impossible.

that there are those among muslims who have the views like i gave examples of above

I notice you use the words 'views' and 'interpretations' for both the understanding of the Muslim scholars and the ignorance of the uneducated. The two are unequal in every respect. These actions that we condemn are not from scholars nor scholarly teachings, they are the result of ignorance concerning Islamic teachings.

they really do exist and these issues need to be addressed by scholars and leaders in islam

Right from the start I pointed out the problem with this repeated statement from non-muslims. The Muslim scholars have been condemning such violent actions left, right and centre. They have been screaming themselves hoarse in condemnation but to no avail, because the problem is not a religious one but a political one. Thus, it merits a political solution.

Regards

 

[snakelegs]

Re: Muslim leaders condemn terrorism

You already have said that there are dangers or problems with our understanding of Islam, but you're not answering my counter question - please show me how my understanding of Islam is dangerous and/or problematic. You keep saying the problem is why my interpretation or the understanding we promote here (which btw to clarify is to simply follow Islam according to the Qur'an and Prophetic teachings), but when I ask you for evidence you resort to referencing individuals who's actions have been condemned by the Muslim majority.

first of all, you are personalizing this - i never said that your understanding of islam is dangerous. i don't pretend to know your understanding anymore than i would pretend to be knowledgeable about islam.

That's as good as if I were to say "we can't live peacefully with westerners because there is a problem with their mentality" and then when asked to support my claim I quote bigots who have said that Mecca should be bombed (and there are many hateful non-muslims who have said this). Does this prove my claim? No, it only shows there are some violent people, not that peace with any westeners is impossible or even difficult.

actually, there are a lot of westerners whose mentality i have major problems with myself! yes, there are indeed many hateful non-muslims. by the way, i mean "mentality" as a neutral term - maybe mindset is a better way to put it.
the type of mindset among some muslims frightens me largely because i don't know how widespread it is. it is not islam - it is a mindset shared by some muslims. maybe if there was a way to know their percentage among all muslims, i would find they are an insignificant few. this is one thing i am trying to figure out and of course, it's impossible to know for sure. my perception is that, though it may be a minority of muslims, it is not at all uncommon and their numbers are increasing and of course, u.s. foreign policy feeds this.

This isn't an interpretation, this is ignorance of Islam's teachings and when I see this on the forum I correct such people, whether publicly or privately. And in response to panatella such occurances are rare, and the people always admit their mistake.

maybe we can agree that ignorance (including mine) is the enemy. right now i am stuck in a place where the more i learn the more alarmed i get.
there are a lot of sentiments expressed here that pass without comment - such as the examples i've already given. (there are also loud silences here.)
these are the views that are incomprehensible and incompatible with western mentality, not that i mean to imply that "western mentality" is a monolith, any more than "muslim mentality".

speaking of monoliths, i understand that this forum does not allow sectarian discussions, which is no doubt a good thing. but the Official Position here seems to be that islam is one thing. i find it interesting that both western bigots and some muslims portray islam as one thing. there are many voices of islam, there are many interpretations - even down to who is a muslim, there are a lot of different rulings. i am in no position to know who is right and who is wrong, but i find much diversity among muslims, and i think this is how it should be, rather than denied. a good example is the dominant interpretation of the islamic ruling on music on this forum. (we won't go in to that!)

I already told you that you are misquoting Islamic legislation and using it support your conclusion. Muslims are not and should not be implementing Hadd punishments in non-muslim countries, so this is hardly a reason to claim that there can be no peaceful coexistence. And you have misquoted all of these laws; I provided the links earlier explaining them in context. All punishments in an Islamic state are only for the protection and preservation of society; if you want to discuss that further we can do so in another thread.

i don't understand this - how could i misquote islamic legislation when i am almost 100% ignorant on this area???? i have never[ quoted islamic law! i have made some ignorant comments on shariah, which you have corrected me on - this is how i learn.
many muslims pray for the day when the world will be run according to shariah - and from what little i do know, this would be quite frightening to a non-muslim, but i'm not really concerned about that because i don't expect it to happen in my lifetime. of course, i know that muslims are not and should not be implementing these laws in non-muslim countries. (there are a few that do, but i realize that according to islam, they should not and do not have the authority to do so - so it is not islamic law that is the problem, it is the way some interpret it. but more than this (everyone has criminals), it is the mindset - as i have given examples of before.

So if you agree that Nazis do not prove anything about coexistence with germans and that crusaders do not prove anything about coexistence with Christians, then why don't you likewise acknowledge that the criminal actions of a minority of Muslims do not prove antyhing about coexistence with Muslims? Obviously the people who we cannot coexist with is the criminal minority, so you should say that instead of saying that you cannot coexist with the majority of Muslims..

when did i say "majority" of muslims? i think it may well be a minority, but it is increasing.
of course, co-existence with germans and christians is no problem. co-existence with the 2 examples you gave - nazis and crusaders would pose an entirely different problem and co-existence with them is definitely not possible.

I have the 'mentality' and the 'interpretation of Islam' that you keep blaming. And yet I live in a non-muslim country coexisting peacefully with non-muslim neighbors. Therefore, your conclusion that is impossible is baseless. And there are millions more Muslims living in non-muslim countries coexisting peacefully.

But you're breaking the bridge yourself. You misquote Hudud punishments and use them as an excuse to conclude that it is impossible for Muslims to coexist peacefully with Non-muslims. You highlight the actions of a crminal minority and conclude from that, that peaceful coexistence is impossible.

There are NO Muslims implementing hadd punishments in non-muslim countries - you can cite a few random criminals here and there but that's the same as if I cited a non-muslim murderer to conclude that the mentality of westerners makes peaceful coexistence impossible.

i realize this. i think i have explained my self enough on this. i have not concluded that co-existence is impossible - i am siimply moving in that direction and i do not want to go there.

I notice you use the words 'views' and 'interpretations' for both the understanding of the Muslim scholars and the ignorance of the uneducated. The two are unequal in every respect. These actions that we condemn are not from scholars nor scholarly teachings, they are the result of ignorance concerning Islamic teachings.

no argument here.

Right from the start I pointed out the problem with this repeated statement from non-muslims. The Muslim scholars have been condemning such violent actions left, right and centre. They have been screaming themselves hoarse in condemnation but to no avail, because the problem is not a religious one but a political one. Thus, it merits a political solution.

i know there are some muslim scholars speaking out, but have no way of knowing how many because the media doesn't want me to know, so they silence the voices of reason.
yes, the current problems are more political than religious and they need to be addressed, as they are getting worse each day.
having said this though i must add that i view islam as not merely a religion, but also a political ideology. (we may disagree here).

if we oversimplify, the polarization is increasing rather than decreasing and every day it is fed some more by both sides. there is a building backlash and i am trying to see if this can be averted before it is too late. unfortunately, i am unable to change it from my side any more than you are from yours.
i had thought the "clash of civilizations" was b.s. but more and more i am wondering if there isn't a major clash of mindsets. i hope it can be overcome before it's too late. so all this stuff i'm saying, is motivated by that concern and not by any hatred of islam or muslims. i hope you can at least understand that.
would you agree there is an important problem between the west and islam above and beyond the obvious political one?
and now i must rest my poor brain and clean my filthy house.
peace.

 

[snakelegs]

just a quickie to others who have commented - i can't reply now because ansar consumes all the brain power i can possibly muster.
but i do want as much imput as possible. this should not be "the ansar and snakelegs show".
besides, your comments would give me a rest from trying to debate/discuss with ansar, who is quite formidable.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Re: Muslim leaders condemn terrorism

Hello Snakelegs,

first of all, you are personalizing this - i never said that your understanding of islam is dangerous. i don't pretend to know your understanding anymore than i would pretend to be knowledgeable about islam.

Well you've commented about the understanding of Islam as presented on this forum. I believe it is reasonable to assume that I have contributed in some way to that presentation of Islam and since I share the same views with a vast majority of forum members, I don't see any stretch in mentioning my views. In fact, I think it is more appropriate to ask you to comment on my views so that I can respond, rather than you commenting on the views of others and me having to speak on their behalf.

So I've personalized it because I can speak on behalf of myself instead of others, and because I feel I have made at least some contributions to the presentation of Islam on the forum.

actually, there are a lot of westerners whose mentality i have major problems with myself!

But we don't say that because of them we Muslims and westenerners cannot live in peace.

this is one thing i am trying to figure out and of course, it's impossible to know for sure. my perception is that, though it may be a minority of muslims, it is not at all uncommon and their numbers are increasing and of course, u.s. foreign policy feeds this.

If by 'mindset' or 'mentality' you are referring to their religious views and understanding, then I would disagree, I don't think that is changing or is even the issue here. If on the other hand you are referring to their political and societal mindset, then you are right, there is an increase in hostility and the causes are socioeconomic and politcal, not religious.

a good example is the dominant interpretation of the islamic ruling on music on this forum. (we won't go in to that!)

That is a legtimate difference of opinion because it is a jurisprudential matter that has some obvious grey areas where the ruling isn't black and white. Allow me to explain.

When it comes to differences of opinion, they fall into many categories. For example, if a group says that there is no Day of Judgement, that is not a legitimate difference of opinion, as that denies a fundamental concept in Islam. The legitmate differences of opinion are only in lesser fiqhî (jurisprudential) matters, i.e. the application of the Islamic laws and fundamentals which are agreed upon. There is no difference of opinion the fundamentals of Islam or the beliefs and theology.

(there are a few that do, but i realize that according to islam, they should not and do not have the authority to do so - so it is not islamic law that is the problem, it is the way some interpret it.

It is not that they have a different interpretation of the Islamic law, it is that they are simply ill-informed and uneducated about the fundamentals of Islamic law.

when did i say "majority" of muslims? i think it may well be a minority, but it is increasing.

What is increasing is hostility rooted in the political situation, not some different interpretation of Islam.

i know there are some muslim scholars speaking out, but have no way of knowing how many because the media doesn't want me to know, so they silence the voices of reason.
yes, the current problems are more political than religious and they need to be addressed, as they are getting worse each day.

Yes.

having said this though i must add that i view islam as not merely a religion, but also a political ideology. (we may disagree here).

Islam is a complete way of life and consequently it contains guidance in political affairs as well, including a complete system of governance. But the political views of some people (eg. american foreign policy is this or that) are not the same as the political legislation of Islam (eg. the khalifa is to do this or that).

would you agree there is an important problem between the west and islam

Yes.

above and beyond the obvious political one?

You'll have to elaborate on one that entails. What kind of conflict did you have in mind?

Regards

 

[Asyur an-Nagi]

Re: Muslim leaders condemn terrorism

this is a very sad comment. what's even more sad is that i am gradually and reluctantly coming to a similar conclusion.
our mentalities are just too different.

how afraid of differences are you?

 

[syilla]

i was wondering...why so afraid of the differences. Since i've seen so many types of culture and religion can coexists...in peace and harmony

 

[catmando]

Ansar hit the nail on the head; Islam is a complete religous AND political system. Islam has not divorced itself from political domination. This is antithetical to America's Democratic traditions. As long as this state of affairs exists in Islamic countries, you cannot expect that we will give up our freedoms for Sharia.

We are fighting the Christian Dominionists who also want to bring America under the control of their religion. They will not succeed. We welcome all people who want to abide by our Constitution, which recognizes that Secular Law is dominant over religous law. That is how it must be in America.

 

[muslim_friend]

We are fighting the Christian Dominionists who also want to bring America under the control of their religion.

I thought Christian groups had America by the collar? :rollseyes

By the way, the ten commandments.. aren't they a part of American law?

 

[north_malaysian]

i was wondering...why so afraid of the differences. Since i've seen so many types of culture and religion can coexists...in peace and harmony

Asians and Africans are not afraid of diversities, usually.

 

[Sis786]

Snakelegs i know what you saying But i dont think its come to us having to divide paths.

Muslims have lived in this country and many other non-muslim countries for years and years, and we have lived in peace.

But 9/11 changed all of that all of a sudden "Muslim Terrorist" have emerged and thats it all Muslims are tarnished with the same brush. Im living in the Uk and i didnt find that 9/11 changed the way people looked at me, yeah u get the odd look but the same look is given when they see a black person or when we see a white person with an england shirt on. Media has printed in our minds these certain "types" and we all abide by that and presume as they are Muslim they are like this.

As for the placcards in that Denmark Demonstration what you have was a really small number of people going on street stating something. Thats it. Now if a few England fans caused trouble in Germany with the Football we cant blame ALL the thousands of fans there can we. Same thing here.

And what people forget is that MAJORITY of the Demonstartiosn were peaceful But this wasnt shown in the Media. And those that did turn nasty were people who were frustrated and people whos goverment wasnt willing to listen and sometimes sometimes it takes a bad demonstartion to get some attention and to be heard. Suppose freedom of speech has to work both ways.

 

[IbnAbdulHakim]

:salamext:

We're on the internet and discussing if we can co-exist... wat the?

I happen to work with and socialise with plenty of non-muslims, my imaan is still strong (Alhamdullilah) and the people respect me and i in return respect them! Whats all this about moving out? Its all about the ability to endure and compromise, if you cant do that then... you got issues coz u really need it for every aspect of life!!

:wasalamex

 

[north_malaysian]

If Non Muslims leave my country, it'll be very confusing. Who'll take care of their big pagodas, cathedrals, cemeteries, businesses? It's illogical!

 

[KAding]

I thought Christian groups had America by the collar? :rollseyes

They don't. Why do you believe so? Can you think of any specific legislation that was passed at the federal level that would confirm this Christian dominance?

By the way, the ten commandments.. aren't they a part of American law?

Absolutely not! Not formally, nor informally!

Lets review the 10 commandments shall we?

1. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me

Not part of any Western law, since atheism, polytheism or any other religion is completely legal in the US

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image

Obviously not part of the law, we can make any image we want to.

3. Thou shalt not thake the name of the Lord thy God in vain

It's absolutely legal to take Gods name in vain. Blashepemy is completely legal

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy

Nope, you can do virtually anything you want on Sunday, including work or for doing unholy things

5. Honour they father and thy mother

Not part of law. I have no obligation to honor my father or mother

6. Thou shalt not kill

Yes, that is part of the law. But then again, it is also part of law of any society, even those that existed before the Old Testament existed

7. Thou shalt not commit adultry

Adultery is absolutely legal, I can commit adultery any time I like

8. Thou shalt not steal

Part of law, duh

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor

Not in a court of law no.

10. Thou shalt not covet

Coveting is perfectly legal. I can desire whatever I like

So, at best 2-3 of the 10 commandments are part of US law. And those are so completely obvious that they would also be part of US law without knowledge of the 10 commandments. :thankyou:

 

[KAding]

Re: Muslim leaders condemn terrorism

Can we coexist?

I have to admit I am slowly coming to the same conclusion as HeiGou and snakelegs. Sure, we can coexist, but the chance of civil strife just increases dramatically. The question is not if we think it should be possible to coexist peaceful in one nation, but whether it giving human nature is likely to be possible over the course of centuries. I am increasingly doubtful of this.

Look, practically all Muslims here know that there primary allegiance is to the umma, not to their country. Clearly, historically this has frequently been a source of civil wars and other unrest. When I hear practically unanimous voices on this forum for example that serving in their countries armed forces is bad, mainly on principle of it being a kufr army, then I worry. Nations need somekind of common identity to function properly, nations are more then just a set of rules worked out in their constitutions and a random piece of territory.

I am a great fan of immigration, but only if eventually the immigrants get absorbed into the existing society. Lets be honest here, Muslims are a proud people, much prouder then virtually any other people. They have absolutely not intention of assimilating, and frankly that is their right. Yet, then we must admit that striving for such a multi-religious nation where people have different loyalties has consequences. We are already blowing eachother up for Gods sake! ffended:

Should we be able to coexist? Yes!
Are we able to coexist on the long term? I strongly doubt it .

 

[KAding]

I am also wondering. Are there countries with significant Muslim minorities (10+% of the population or regions with local Muslim majorities) that are not experiencing somekind of civil strife? It's not important whether Muslims are to blame or other peoples, but we must be realistic on this.

I mean, just of the top of my hat going from West to East:
Ivory Coast: Civil war largely along religious lines
Nigeria: unrest in the Muslim north
Serbia: Kosovo
Russia: Don't even have to mention Chechnya
India: frequent riots and clashes between Hindus and Muslims, thousands of dead each year
Thailand: We all know about the troubles in the south
Phillipines: In the south there is a small civil war in progress
China: Always issues in the far west about its Muslim minorities

I mean, knowing human nature and seeing all these examples, why would we even want to live in the same territory? Are we really so naive to think all will be well?

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Ansar hit the nail on the head; Islam is a complete religous AND political system. Islam has not divorced itself from political domination. This is antithetical to America's Democratic traditions. As long as this state of affairs exists in Islamic countries, you cannot expect that we will give up our freedoms for Sharia.

No doubt there is an ideological incompatibility. Muslims believe that God has ordained the appropriate way of life for human beings, while secularists believe that man can formulate his own way of life in accordance with his subjective inclinations. That difference is ideological, not methodological. The latter referring the to the methodology which we employ to bring about ideological changes. Muslims are not allowed to impose their beliefs on others or compel others to follow the same path. So a Muslim may live next door to a Christian and an Atheist, and while all three have ideological differences, their methodology allows for peaceful coexistence. That is exactly the case here.

We welcome all people who want to abide by our Constitution, which recognizes that Secular Law is dominant over religous law. That is how it must be in America.

Islam commands us to follow the laws of the country in which we abide. As Shaykh Salmân Al-'Awdah mentions:

Muslims living in non-Muslim countries have to comply with laws and regulations of the country they have been entrusted though valid visas to enter. At the same time, they have to avoid whatever contradicts Islamic teachings. In case they are obliged by law to uphold something contrary to Islamic teachings, they have to adhere to the minimum that the law requires of them. (Full Fatwâ here)​

Regards

 

[muslim_friend]

They don't. Why do you believe so? Can you think of any specific legislation that was passed at the federal level that would confirm this Christian dominance?

I said that because during the 2004 election campaigning, Bush and Kerry focussed a lot on gaining support from Christian groups. Actually, the reason for Bush's victory in the last elections was supposed to be his usage of the word 'God' in his campaigns.

So, at best 2-3 of the 10 commandments are part of US law. And those are so completely obvious that they would also be part of US law without knowledge of the 10 commandments. :thankyou:

I suppose your'e right :thankyou:

 

[nimrod]

The answer to the question is, yes we can peaceably co-exist.
The other answer is, no, we can’t peaceably co-exist with terrorist.

If Islam wants to peaceably co-exist with the world, then it will have to do a better job of coughing up folks like Bin Ladin.

We can’t co-exist with folks like him.

Ansar say's that Bin Ladin’s groups don’t have their own interpretations of what Islam is, only ignorance. I would have to figure they have a different opinion of what is ignorance and what isn’t.

It can’t be left up to the western world to do the lion’s share of the work to corral those who abuse Islam.

Until there is a truly Islamic state in today’s world and they take over and LEAD the fight against those who abuse Islam, we can’t peaceably co-exist.

Ansar, I am assuming that if a person went back and examined the threads concerning the theories that Bush/Blair brought down the Twin Towers themselves, we will see your corrections all over the place correcting ignorance?

The United States will not suffer through another 9-11 without raining bad news down on a very large part of the Muslim world.
That would be terrible.

Iraq has shown the American public that spending money and lives on changing middle-eastern countries simply isn’t worth it. It is cheaper to bomb than it is to pay to gain the Middle East’s help.

Many, many more folks will die in the next western answer to a 9-11 event.

No one benefits from that.

There is an answer though.
Correcting Muslim’s thinkings and understandings of Islam MUST come from Islamic countries, in a loud and prolonged manner.

Recent history, the past 80 or so years hasn’t seen that.

Show the web-site that is in turmoil due to all the millions of Muslims that are condemning the suicide bombers in Iraq right now. I haven’t managed to find one.

Does any thinking person doubt that the think tanks, that form the opinions that result in government actions, aren’t watching the events un-fold in Somalia right now?


Thanks
Nimrod

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

If Islam wants to peaceably co-exist with the world, then it will have to do a better job of coughing up folks like Bin Ladin.

Stop inventing a fictitous person and calling him 'Islam'. Islam is a religion, not a person that needs to this or wants to do that. As for what Muslims are doing, I have already pointed out that there has been universal condemnation of such atrocities by the Muslim scholars, they have taken the initiative to combat extremism in educational institutes, the Muslims are doing as much as they can from a religious perspective. But since the origin of the problem is not religious but rather political, it merits a political solution as it is the current global politics which is breeding this hatred and hostility.

Ansar say's that Bin Ladin’s groups don’t have their own interpretations of what Islam is, only ignorance. I would have to figure they have a different opinion of what is ignorance and what isn’t.

If all these people simply have a different interpretation of Islam, then were on earth was this interpretation just a few decades ago? Why has there suddenly been an outburst in recent years of this kind of violence and alleged violent ideology? Why do all these actions which cast a negative image on Islam seem to happen continuously in a convenient pattern? Coincidence or conspiracy?

And yes, I do maintain that those who commit such actions are ill-informed of Islamic teachings, they have been rejected by the scholars of the Muslim Ummah, and there is not a scholar from amongst them.

It can’t be left up to the western world to do the lion’s share of the work to corral those who abuse Islam.

They only need to put a stop to the causes of political hostility on their side.

Until there is a truly Islamic state in today’s world and they take over and LEAD the fight against those who abuse Islam, we can’t peaceably co-exist.

So because there is not a united government in the middle east, you say I am not allowed to peacefully coexist with my non-muslim neighbors? I'm sorry but that doesn't follow logically.

Ansar, I am assuming that if a person went back and examined the threads concerning the theories that Bush/Blair brought down the Twin Towers themselves, we will see your corrections all over the place correcting ignorance?

I'm not sure what you mean here. If you are implying that I have some kind of duty to study and research the facts and the fiction in conspiracy theories, then no, that is not my duty. My duty is to condemn unislamic acts, regardless of who the perpetrators were, and to spread the correct teachings of Islam. Whatever the reality of these events may be, people are free to believe what they want. NASA doesn't compel people to believe that they landed on the moon.

Iraq has shown the American public that spending money and lives on changing middle-eastern countries simply isn’t worth it.

Is that why they went in?

Correcting Muslim’s thinkings and understandings of Islam MUST come from Islamic countries, in a loud and prolonged manner.

Wake up, nimrod.
http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/terror.htm
http://www.saudiembassy.net/ReportLink/Report_Extremism_May04.pdf
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/5111092.stm
http://www.caircan.ca/itn_more.php?id=A1789_0_2_0_M
http://salafipublications.com/sps/sLF/sLF.cfm?sc=channel&CID=3
http://www.salafipublications.com/sps/downloads/pdf/GSC020003.pdf
http://www.al-athariyyah.com/Data_Files/Articles/Terrorism/CalamityofbinLaadin.pdf
Thousands of condemnations are listed here. But since the origin of the problem is political and not religious, it merits a politcal solution, not a religious one.

 

[seek.learn]

...universal condemnation of such atrocities by the Muslim scholars, they have taken the initiative to combat extremism in educational institutes, the Muslims are doing as much as they can from a religious perspective. But since the origin of the problem is not religious but rather political, it merits a political solution as it is the current global politics which is breeding this hatred and hostility....
...But since the origin of the problem is political and not religious, it merits a politcal solution, not a religious one.

Salaam o alaikum,
Peace,

I could never have said that in any better way.

No doubt we muslims have alot to do as an ummah. And scholars are certainly trying to do their part by trying to educate the average muslim. But that isnt the only thing wrong here.

It takes two. Always.

WAllahu Alam. And Allah knows best.

May Allah forgive and guide me and us all. Aameen.

Alaikum Salaam
Peace