Why are there no ISKCON temples in Saudi Arabia???

[krsna 3]

 

/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

How about a big ISKCON Mecca Temple so devotees could preach and distribute books to all the pilgrims who come there every year??? /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[Kulapavana 0]

why there is no temple in every major city in US?

how about major cities in Europe?

 

and more importantly: Do not preach where you are not welcome. There is plenty of fertile ground for Lord Caitanya's movement all over the world, where people are open to our message.

[theist 1]

Keep stirring the pot krsna. /images/graemlins/grin.gif Sometimes the question itself provides the answer.

[Guest guest]

Why don't stones roll uphill?

 

Alas - that country is quite narrow in its metting out religious rights to others in that country - it is indeed sad. I am sure that times will change - they will soften...

 

BDM

[krsna 3]

 

They would all make nice Lord Shiva bhaktas, don't you think? /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Guest guest]

is there really a shiva lingam inside there at meca

[krsna 3]

There is quite a bit of irony in the fact that the pilgrimage to Mecca represents a form of idol worship, one of the cardinal sins of Islam. The Black Stone, held in the Kaaba, represents the centre of the Islamic world. Most pilgrims will try desperately to touch and kiss The Stone as they circumambulate the Kaaba. This ritual is probably a legacy of pre-Mohammedan animism.

 

Some Hindus have suggested from the color and shape of The Black Stone, that it is essentially a Shiva Lingam, perhaps initially worshipped by Hindu traders to Arabia or brought over by Arabs themselves to worship. Either seems possible as the most sacred and oldest Shiva temple in India, Somnath, is located on the West coast of the most Western of India's states, Gujarat, which was and continues to be a major trading partner with the Arab world.

 

Like Muslims circumambulating the Kaaba, Hindus worship Shiva by walking around the Shiva Lingam. It would be ironic indeed if billions of Muslims through the centuries have been worshipping Shiva, particularly since Hindus are regarded as the ultimate sinners by Muslims for practicing idolatry, and since Somnath has been the most frequently destroyed of temples by Muslim conquerors.

 

Barry

 

Posted by: barry at August 9, 2005

[Guest guest]

by Paolo Bassi

 

Saudi Arabia (formerly known as Arabia , before the Saud family took ownership and modestly renamed it) is the historic, cultural and religious center of Islam. The Saudi ruling elite, in partnership with the hardline Wahhabi religious establishment, see themselves as the guardians, and indeed exporters, of Sunni Islam. Consequently, there is little room in Arabia for the rights of religious minorities, most of whom are guest workers working in low paid menial jobs. Saudi Arabia is in fact a fully fledged religious apartheid system. Non-Muslims simply have no right to worship freely, build temples or churches, testify against a Muslim, hold political office or in fact hold any authority over Muslims. At all times, the non-Muslim is expected to know his place and act with subservience and deference towards Muslims. Islamic law denies non-Muslims the most basic aspect of humanity, love itself. A non-Muslim man must not make the mistake of falling in love with a Muslim woman, since Islam forbids such a union. However, Islamic law does allow, and in fact encourages, Muslim men to marry non-Muslim women (provided they convert to Islam), thereby strengthening Islam demographically. The reason for the inferior status of non-Muslims is very simple – the Koran and Islamic law are regarded as divine and demand power for Islam and power demands religious apartheid. In turn Saudi rulers, as self-appointed guardians of Islam, enforce these Nuremberg style laws. Their very power depends on this. No matter how skillfully apologists and favored Islamic scholars in the west, such as John Esposito and Karen Armstrong, explain Islam, these facts that cannot be silenced.

 

Whereas the racial apartheid of South Africa was universally condemned, there is almost no mention of Saudi Arabia 's religious apartheid. The reasons, in part, are based on economics, oil and the sale of arms by western governments. However, there is also the self-censorship, based on intellectual dishonesty and moral cowardice of western intellectuals, in criticizing Islamic law. Western liberals and feminists reserve their anger for issues such as the Saudi ban on females driving cars – as if this is the apex of human suffering – yet these same humane liberals are oblivious to Saudi Arabia's apartheid imposed on millions of non-Muslim guest workers who toil in insecurity and fear (it must be noted that the Wahhabist Sunni establishment also discriminates against the small Shia minority). Along with western silence, there is no outrage or condemnation from Muslims at Saudi Arabia 's treatment of its religious minorities. While the Palestinian issue, the French head scarf ban or the cartoons of Mohammad are regarded as attacks on Islam by Muslims, there is almost complete amnesia when it comes to those victimized by Islam. The question of what is more hurtful to human dignity, religious apartheid or a few cartoons of Mohammad, needs to be asked by Muslims non-Muslims alike.

 

Imagine if the sheer energy expended over protesting the Mohammad cartoons, was directed by Muslims at fighting for equal political rights for women and non-Muslims. Imagine 100,000 Muslims protesting in Karachi , Tehran and Riyadh , demanding that the Saudi religious apartheid system be dismantled. Imagine courageous Muslim lawyers litigating those parts of Islamic law, that call for the subjugation of non-Muslims, as hate doctrine. Would Islamists anywhere then stand a chance of dividing Muslim from Non-Muslim?

[krsna 3]

krsna post above

[suchandra 1]

There could be some truth to the story of archangel Lucifer when he depressed and poutful left the eternal kingdom of God. In the Garden of Eden there was Adam and Eve and by Lucifer's influence Cain took birth from Eve, actually Lucifer's son. With the descendants of Cain, the demons became established on planet earth:

tat sadhu manye 'sura-varya dehinam

sada samudvigna-dhiyam asad-grahat

hitvatma-patam grham andha-kupam

vanam gato yad dharim asrayeta

Prabhupada: "My dear father..." And his father was materialist. Therefore materialists are called in Sanskrit language, asura. Asura. There are two kinds of human being all the time: asura and deva. Deva means human beings who are connected with the Supreme Lord. Their life is for realization of the Supreme Truth. They are called deva. Just like in higher planets, there are also living beings. They are called devatas, demigods, because their magnitude of pleasure is far, far greater than ours. But because they do everything in relation with the Supreme Lord, therefore they are called devatas, devata. Devata means demigods. And asura. Asura means just the opposite. They simply enjoy life for the matter of sense pleasure. That's all. So those who are interested in sense pleasure, they are called asuras, and those who are interested in unending spiritual pleasure, they are called devatas. Devata and asura does not mean that asuras are very ugly and devatas are very beautiful. Even the ugly man can become a devata, or even a beautiful man may become asura. That is due to his mentality. Because, after all, the soul is pure. When he is in unnatural condition of life, wants to enjoy simply the material senses, he becomes asura. So asura can be turned into devata. There is no hindrance...."

[krsna 3]

’Islamism’: A Concept invented by the infidel for the infidel! Mark Alexander

2006/03/15

 

The mantra, ‘Islamism’, is repeated time and time again, over and over, ad nauseum, ad infinitum, especially by those who are in denial: ‘Islamism’, they say, not Islam, is the source of our problems. It is what feeds the perpetrators of Islamic terror.

 

The liberal media, in particular, love this word, since it allows them to talk about the problems we face with Islam, without causing offence to Muslims throughout the world. It creates a distinction between good, practising Muslims and their extremist co-religionists. Alas, it is a false distinction!

 

Our politicians love the term, because it allows them to duck the obvious need to come to terms with the fact that a major world religion – Islam – is out to destroy our way of life, out to destroy our social structure, out to destroy our civilization! In short, ‘Islamism’ is a concept dreamt up by the infidel for the infidel. It lets him off the hook!

 

The fact of the matter, however, is that the use of the term ‘Islamism’ obfuscates the true problem we face, namely the growth of Islam in the West, and therefore the increasing Islamization of our societies and our civilization. It also obfuscates the causes of the jihad itself – the tool of the Muslim to bring Islam to the rest of the world, the tool to turn Dar ul Harb, the House of War, into Dar ul Islam, the House of Islam, the tool to Islamize the regions of the world which have yet to be Islamized, to Islamize the regions of the world still living, in their opinion, in a state of moral chaos, in a state of pre-Islamic disorder, otherwise known among Muslims as a state of Jahiliyyah.

 

Our real problem is Islam, the real thing. Muslims do not use the term ‘Islamism’. The concept is unknown to them, other than as a term used by the infidel to try and make sense of the aggressive nature of their faith.

 

Let us, for goodness' sake, think clearly, for without clear-thinking, we shall never overcome this grave threat to our civilization. To talk of 'Islamism', and make a false distinction between that and Islam, is like making a false distinction between Christianity and 'Christianism'! We don't do this with Christianity, so why should we do it with Islam?

 

The jihad is fed by nothing other than Islam itself! That means to say that it is fed by the Qur'an, the teachings and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (Ahadith), and the life of the Prophet (As Sirah). These are the sources of the problem - die Quelle des Übels, la source du mal! It is what so-called 'Islamism' is based on! ‘Islamism', if it is anything at all, is not a source, but the result of taking the religion of Islam literally; and that's what all true Muslims do anyway.

 

The Jihad is a duty resting on the shoulders of all Muslims. It is a must, or wajib. It is an integral part of the faith of Islam. One cannot be a true, practising Muslim and reject the call to Jihad, or holy war.

 

To accept this term ‘Islamism’ is tantamount to playing with the meaning of words; to use the term is tantamount to engaging in semantics! One is engaging in verbal acrobatics; one is contorting the brain!

 

Our problem is Islam. Islam, based as it is on al Qur’an, Ahadith, and as Sirah, is the source of the Jihad, and inspiration for it. Nothing else!

 

We must come to terms with this fact if we ever wish to get a handle on the problems facing us. To talk in riddles helps not a soul, and it certainly doesn’t help the war effort!

 

©Mark

[krsna 3]

 

<HR><!-- title -->

<!-- attribution -->Mona Charen

2006/03/18 NewsAndOpinion.com| <!-- attribution --><!-- BEGIN ARTICLE -->

Among the most moving scenes in film history occurs in "To Kill a Mockingbird," in which the little girl, Scout, who has been watching her lawyer/father plead for the life of a falsely accused black man in the old South, is exhorted by an elderly black spectator in the gallery to rise to her feet. "Your father is passing," he explains.

I thought of that after viewing video of a woman who must be one of the bravest souls on earth. A Syrian-born psychologist who now lives and works in Southern California, Dr. Wafa Sultan caused a sensation when she appeared on Al-Jazeera TV in a debate with an Egyptian professor of Islamic Studies named Dr. Ibrahim Al-Khouli. Speaking (in Arabic) as if the words could not come quickly enough to keep up with her thoughts, Dr. Sultan offered the most impassioned defense of Western civilization I have heard in a very long time. Certainly she was more ardent for the values we hold dear than most liberal Democrats.

She began by describing the struggle in which we are engaged as one between "two opposites, between two eras." It is a clash, she said, "between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. It is a clash between human rights on the one hand, and the violation of those rights on the other hand . . . "

Dr. Al-Khouli was clearly taken aback.

 

Are you saying, the host asked, "that what is happening today is a clash between the culture of the West and the backwardness and ignorance of the Muslims?"

"Yes," replied Sultan, "that is what I mean."

She wasn't finished. Not by a mile. She went on to scorn Muslim clerics who say out of one side of their mouths that Islam forbids them to offend the beliefs of others, and yet characterize Christians and Jews as "those who incur Allah's wrath" or as apes and pigs. She paused to consider the common Islamic description of Jews and Christians as "People of the Book."

"They are not the 'People of the Book,' they are people of many books. All the useful scientific books that you have today are theirs, the fruit of their tree and creative thinking."

Sultan then forthrightly explained that she herself is neither Muslim, Christian nor Jew, but simply a secular human being. She does not believe in the supernatural, but respects the right of others to believe what they wish.

"Are you a heretic?" demanded Al-Khouli in triumphant tones. "You can say whatever you like," she replied. In an age that has brought us the Theo van Gogh assassination, deadly riots over a series of Danish newspaper cartoons, the Pym Fortune assassination, the death threats against Salman Rushdie, Hirsi Ali and Ibn Warraq, among many others, it requires truly remarkable courage to stare into the Al-Jazeera camera and calmly permit yourself to be labeled a heretic.

Sultan was raised as a pious Muslim, but her faith was shaken when she was studying medicine at the Aleppo University in northern Syria. As The New York Times reported, terrorists from the Muslim Brotherhood burst into her classroom in 1979 and shot her professor as she watched. "They shot hundreds of bullets into him, shouting, 'God is great.'" It was a turning point in her life. She eventually left her home and moved with her husband and children to the United States.

Sultan's debate is available on The Middle East Media Research Institute's website at www.memritv.org. MEMRI says that the video has already received 3 million hits since it first aired on Feb. 21, 2006. Courage is among the rarest of virtues. Most people will not risk even the displeasure of their boss, far less their very lives, for something they believe in. Sultan doubtless speaks for millions of Muslims who similarly deplore the barbarism that has come to dominate large segments of the Muslim world. But without leadership like hers, they must feel besieged and beleaguered. Her heroic stand deserves our awe and deep respect. Stand up: Ms. Sultan is passing.

[krsna 3]

by Vernon Richards

 

 

America is hated in large parts of the Middle East and Asia, but the more educated and affluent Muslims usually wear Levi jeans while shouting 'death to America '. When the cameras are gone and the frenzy is over, they can often be found cueing up at Western embassies, hoping for a visa to immigrate in search of a ‘better life’. This hate/love relationship many Muslims have with western democracy, freedoms, culture, and technology is despised by their more aged Imams, who then respond by ratcheting-up the hate-America sermons. They paint illusions of Western conspiracies into young minds in the region, desperately trying to hold back the forces of enlightenment and change.

Muslim spokespersons claim moral purity in their fight against ‘decadent’ Westerners. Indeed, Muslims told an infidel forced himself sexually on a nine years old girl would quickly condemn such a man for being a pedophile, and then he would be lynched. But mention the Prophet Mohammed slept with a girl of the same age, and watch Muslims overact with all kinds of rationalizations such as 'girls in those days matured fast' or 'it was normal and acceptable in that culture', etc. Apparently it was also normal in those days to rape a widow the same night you slaughtered her beloved husband in an unprovoked raid. To normal thinking feeling human beings, the phrase ‘most merciful’ would not seem to apply to either of these divinely sanctioned acts by Muhammad, yet somehow such contradictions are lost on Muslims.

We hear that Muslims believe the Black Stone circled in Mecca is conscious and will testify for and against them on Judgment Day (though they will deny it, the stone and ritual is based on a pagan deity). Meanwhile Muslims all over the world gleefully bring down ‘un-Islamic’ idols, statues, and figures representing deities in other religions. The physical manifestation of Allah, in the form of a conscience stone, is an important core of Muslims’ connection with deity. A pillar of Islam states that every individual must make a pilgrimage to the stone and pay homage. Having done so, a good Muslims can then return to his/her home and with greater piety plot violence against pagan idol worshipers of all sorts.

The world continues to find disappointment as it waits for the majority of ‘moderate’ Muslims to bring the extremists into line. The problem is that even moderate Muslims have enormous capacity to absorb great hypocrisies. It appears the vast majority of people from Islamic lands develop early a capacity to accept extreme contradictions without question. Remaining completely unfazed, they continue to call monsters who target innocents ‘mujahedeen’ (holy warriors). With nary a blink, moderates and extremists alike call fiends who target Jewish children in Israel ‘mujahedeen’. Arab Muslim societies, instead of developing any empathy for the victims of Muslim terrorists, race backward into ever deeper superstition, bigotry, and a culture of blame which renders reformation impossible. Huge parts of the Muslim world are afflicted with what can only be called world-wide denial, if not a deep psychosis characterized by a false sense of superiority and irrational hatred of all others, particularly those capable of defending themselves. If a small group of Muslim terrorists are humiliated in Abu-Graib prison, and all Muslims take it personally, gathering in great numbers to demand revenge. But the treatment of Iraqi western ‘collaborators’ by the prisoners ‘peers’ evokes little concern. If any American (non-Muslim) soldier were to be captured, is there any doubt as to his fate? Muslims around the world appear largely indifferent to the most in-humane treatment of infidels in Iraq. Many even relish videos and reports of atrocities as if it is some sort of Islamic national sport ("An American is killed with a road-side bomb …score one for Muhammad!")

But then, even the term "holy war" (Jihad) is an oxymoron. There is nothing ‘holy’ about War, even when necessary to preserve a society, and there is certainly nothing warlike in any pure religion based on a kind benevolent God. The last 1400 years of history warn us that the typical Muslim variant of War usually involves targeting innocents, raping, and pillaging. Thinking, feeling human beings consider such acts much less than ‘Holy’, despite the usual chants of "Allah Akbar" by vile marauders. Muslims, however, seem largely oblivious to the self-evident truth that the greatest blasphemers in any religion are those who kill in God’s name. Numerous videos exist showing chanting Islamists sawing off the head of some poor victim. Such videos are in high demand in Islamic lands, in what can only be described as some form of sick Islamic rapture. What are in reality the worst examples of hypocrisy and human depravity, is to many Muslims wonderful examples of pure spirituality. If a spirit is involved with such human depravity, it can only be an evil spirit, and could not be a spirit based on kindness, love, mercy, and forgiveness. Those who take pleasure from someone else’s pain are correctly called Sadists, and are mentally and emotionally maladjusted (ill). In Iraq, nary a peep is heard as devout brothers kill while using a white flag as a cover, civilians are exploited as shields, or passers-by are blown apart with or without damaging the declared enemy. Add to this the deafening silence connected to hundreds of kidnapping of civilians, UN and NGO workers, and the decapitation of all such "prisoners." In Muslim minds, condemnation remains unthinkable for reasons of a faith and a theology which dehumanizes all non-Muslims.

Acts by sadistic terrorists produce by design extreme human suffering and pain to innocent and unsuspecting victims. Instead of an act of wanton brutality and murder producing shame for the family of the perpetrator, it is common for a festive ceremony known as "the wedding of the martyr" ('irs al-shahid) to be held in honor of the murderer. The celebration is held to symbolize the murders wedding in paradise with 72 virgins. At these events, the family receives guests who offer more congratulations than condolences for their son's martyrdom. Feb 28, 2005, suicide bomber Raid Mansour al-Banna detonated a car bomb at a busy bazaar in Hilla Iraq, killing 132 Muslims and seriously injuring 120 more. Iraqis were incensed that a 'irs al-shahid was celebrated by the Jordanian family of the murderer. But would these same angry Iraqi people objected if the victims had been Americans, Jews, Russians, Hindus, Christians, or <your religion here>, or would these same concerned Muslims likely have attended that hated celebration. Today, many worldwide take glee witnessing the various beheadings, executions, and other unspeakable images shown repeatedly on Arabic satellite TV to a demanding audience. Tongues click in many ‘peaceful’ households for what passes as spirituality to these people. In an ongoing blatant example of Islamic hypocrisy, a deafening silence is observed throughout the Arab world while horrendous crimes continue to be committed by Muslim Arabs against their Muslim brothers, sisters, and children in Sudan. Islamic leaders strain and choke on a sand fly, yet it seems an adult camel can easily slide down their throat.

Honor killings are yet another blight tarnishing Islamic claims to be the worlds ‘best’ religion. The same culture that requires a son to brutally murder a daughter to 'preserve family honor', also celebrates wholesale murder of innocents, both considered pious acts justified to defend the demands of family/religious ‘honor’. It’s a strange thing, this Islamic concept of honor. As George Orwell said; "There are spectacles before which even satire herself stands mute." Duplicity is the ability to articulate and adhere to two completely opposing moral standards at the same time, and is a sign of both intellectual immaturity and moral bankruptcy. Sadly, even reading these words, most Muslims will refuse to see any contradictions whatsoever, the natural result of a lifetime of conformity to Islam and shunning critical thought. Anger is the only reaction allowed to words not gushing with praise and adulation towards Islam. If Islam really were a great and peaceful religion, we might expect peace, prosperity, and enlightenment to break out all over in lands it governs. Instead everywhere Islam goes, all the locals get is poverty, oppression, corruption, murder, rape, and thievery. The facts on the ground confirm this, notwithstanding the vigorous, often threatening denials of Islamists. "How beautiful the Emperors robe", they exclaim, while the rest of the world sees the ugly nakedness of a violent people and culture. "Islamophobic bigot!" they scream, as they sharpen their blades and plan their next vile act in the name of their hateful God Allah. Today's Middle East is a region where even words have been systematically corrupted. Dictatorship is called "nationalism", stealing is called "Jizya", terrorism is called "holy war", murder is called "martyrdom", and terrorists have become "insurgents".

The intractable problems embedded within Islamic doctrine and culture is often quite obvious, to anyone but Muslims who seem to have their Islamic blinders super-glued on. As in Gene Roddenberry's classical Star Trek ‘Borg’ culture, individuality and humanity were the first causalities of Muhammad’s Ummah (Muslim collective). Normal human reasoning and feeling were replaced with teachings and practices which serve to blunt conscience, suppress the heart, and cloud the mind. Muhammad’s ‘religion’ supplanted any opportunity for individual virtue and spiritual growth, replacing it instead with required obedience to a culture steeped in misogamy, bigotry, racism, and violence. Whereas most of us see ourselves as humans first and consider other humans as sanctioned beings, Muslims see themselves as Muslims first and non-Muslims as something much less than human. Muslim militants are constantly reinforced with the idea they are the ‘best’ of people and reminded non-believers are worthless to their Allah. With this bigoted/racist theology placed firmly in their hearts, they can easily view the pain and death of all non-brothers as a good thing, by whatever method. In this way horrible acts committed by Muslim ‘martyrs’ become sacred acts to be revered. When firmly in place, this Teflon theological/psychological construct shields victimizers from normal guilt or regret, easily allowing the Muslim collective to escape all culpability in their own minds and hearts. As they pile one misfortune after another upon themselves and their communities they easily escape all culpability. Being neither blind nor stupid, they plainly see the blood on their own hands, yet remain unmoved in sincere belief that Allah is pleased at such a spectacle. Were the millions of victims persecuted by devout Muslims following the enshrined tenants of anti-Semitism, bigotry, and racism, themselves bigots deserving of their fates? Were the 3000+ infidels brutally murdered 9/11 deserving of their fate at the hands of Islam? Were they truly worthless and ‘unloved’ by Allah? Are Muslims really superior and entitled to the lands, wealth, and lives of non-believers? We should not be so surprised that an entire culture can be deceived by such pure evil, as it has happened on a national level before in recent history. Nazi thugs justified vile acts in the same way, using the same kind of thought processes and methods of psychological manipulation/intimidation.

While making excuses for vile behavior of brothers, defenders of the Qur’an also claim the book promotes scholarly leaning, when in fact it is filled with nonsensical fantasy often in direct contradiction to scientific fact. Muslims present Islam as a religion which encourages learning, reminding others that Muhammad said "seek knowledge even if it is China", while at the same time any book of knowledge perceived as contradicting the Qur’an is considered satanic. The direction remains for such heresy to be destroyed forthwith. The Royal Library of Alexandria in Egypt, founded at the beginning of the 3rd century during the reign of Ptolemy II, was once the largest in the world, at its peak storing up to 700,000 scrolls. In 640 AD Moslem marauders took the city, and upon learning of "a great library containing all the knowledge of the world" the conquering general asked Khalifa Omar for instructions. Omar is quoted as saying of the Library's holdings, "they will either contradict the Qur’an, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, so they are superfluous", whereupon he ordered the library to be destroyed and the books burnt.

For the last 1400 years, millions of victims have been persecuted by devout Muslims following Muhammad’s enshrined tenants based on anti-Semitism, bigotry, and racism. To ‘real’ Muslims, the infidels brutally murdered 9/11 were deserving of their fate, because they were worthless and ‘unloved’ by Allah. Muslims continue to follow a doctrine to dominate and subjugate others, believing in a man who told them God sanctifies murder, slavery, lying, rape, arson, and thievery against other human beings (albeit non-believers), as acts of great piety which will be rewarded in Islamic heaven. All the while Islamic historians continue to rewrite history to turn Muslim marauders into champions, and blood-thirsty terrorists into Saints. From the distorted Muslim prospective, Muslims are always presented as the poor, picked-on, persecuted lot, such self-pity providing justification for any and all criminal acts. Their culture feeds extremism instead of sanctioning and subduing destabilization. Chaos is a tool of Islamists to weaken and subdue other cultures and societies, and contributors to such anarchy are congratulated instead of jailed. When no provocation exists, one can always be easily created before or after the fact. Conspiracies abound in the mind of Muslim leaders from Muhammad to today, which have served to more than justify 1400 years of very ‘real’ Muslim conspiracies against her neighbors. For centuries, from the Iberian peninsula to the Indian subcontinent, jihad campaigns waged by Muslim armies against infidel Jews, Pagans, Zoroastrians, Christians, Buddhists, and Hindus were punctuated by massacres, including mass beheadings. Iberia (Spain) was conquered in 710-716 AD. During this period of "enlightened" Muslim rule, the Christians of Toledo (Iberia Spain) first submitted to their Arab Muslim invaders, but then revolted under dhimmi in 713. In the harsh Muslim reprisal that ensued, Toledo was pillaged, and all their Christian leaders had their throats cut. More Toledan revolts followed. In 806, seven hundred inhabitants were executed, and yet again in 811-819 when the Christian ‘insurgents’ were crucified, as prescribed in the Qur’an. "For those who do not submit to Allah their punishment is . . . execution or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet, from the opposite sides, or exile from the land." (Surah 5:33)

Islamic politicians demand western societies show tolerance toward Islamic laws and customs, while no such accommodation is offered non-Muslims in Islamic lands. CAIR and other Islamic organizations in the US are quick to pull the trigger claiming religious persecution, seeing civil rights violations in every shadow. Meanwhile the same ‘sensitive’ individuals remain in complete denial to human rights violations perpetrated by Muslims worldwide. The UN and Organization of Islamic States are equally quick to complain of the slightest appearance of bias, but even quicker to ignore gross violations of ‘human-rights’ perpetrated by Muslims against non-believers. Muslims throughout Europe and the US were enraged when Tariq Ramadan (an Islamic ‘intellectual’ with radical, anti-Christian, anti-American ideas) was denied a visa and so tenure at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana. Suddenly so many Muslims were terribly worried about stifling intellectual freedom. Of course no one thinks to ask just how many Christian or openly anti-Islamic scholars have jobs at Islamic universities, as such a question is unthinkable. It is amusing to see Muslim folk rise to promote diversity, freedom, moral values, or equality. Sort of like the owners of the sunken Titanic coming out to promote ‘Iceberg Awareness Week’.

The ‘Red-Crescent’ was formed to be an answer to the Western ‘Red-Cross’, yet it follows strict Islamic doctrine in limiting its services to Muslim Brothers and Sisters. When terrible, brutal things happen to non-believers anywhere, at the hands of Muslims or not, shoulders are shrugged as they say "it is the will of Allah". But such antipathy disappears when Muslims strike a blow maiming any part of a population of non-believers, say …Americans, Indians, Russians, Jews, Australians, Italians, Spanish, Brits, Philippines, etc etc. Each success at such malice, instead of invoking sympathy or regret, serves as proof manifest that their ‘most compassionate, most-merciful’ Allah is indeed God. Hell, they seem to get the same warm giddy feeling of self-righteousness and superiority when Sunni and Shiite kill each other in large numbers.

It is an Islamic mandate that all Muslims victims must be properly avenged, but apparently there is no such thing as an Infidel victim. When the victim is not Muslim, or insufficiently Muslim, hyper-sensitivity suddenly turns to mind-boggling apathy. With the knowledge that the victims in Beslan were not Muslim but the attackers were, acute empathy and compassion is instantly replaced with casual indifference. Yet if the attackers would have been non-Muslim and the children and their parents Muslim, is there any doubt protests and revenge attacks would have spanned the globe? Indeed, horrendous crimes continue to be committed by Muslim Arabs against (insufficiently Muslim) brothers, sisters, and children in Sudan, while a deafening silence is observed throughout the Arab world. Arabs know all about what is going on in Darfur, even Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya have started reporting some aspects of the crisis, but they don't react. Muslim public opinion with regard to the ongoing genocide has remained muted, causing barely an eyebrow to be raised. Yet had the slaughter targeted Arab Muslims perpetrated by Infidels, there would have been an uproar.

In Iraq, nary a peep is heard as devout brothers kill while using a white flag as a cover, civilians are exploited as shields, or passers-by are blown apart with or without damaging the declared enemy. Add to this the deafening silence connected to hundreds of kidnapping of civilians, UN and NGO workers, and the decapitation of all such "prisoners". As Shiite Muslims continue to be slaughtered by their more extremist ‘brothers’ in Iraq, moderate Muslim nations seem to be able to find very little to criticize. Thousands of innocents Iraqis have been deliberately targeted and died at the hands of merciless terrorists, yet somehow America is to blame for the carnage.

Muslim spokesmen claim to oppose intolerance, and then in the same breath attack anyone who exposes the criminality of any Muslim brother. When U.S. Marine in Iraq killed a wounded terrorist, in a place where wounded terrorists are a fatal threat, Muslims demand justice and revenge. But when vile Muslim murderers kill a helpless woman serving needy Iraqi Muslims for decades, Muslims can only shrug their shoulders, and the perpetrators are protected instead of being brought to justice. If a Palestinian is killed in Israel, even if he has been involved in hundreds of attacks against Jews, Muslims worldwide chant and demand revenge. Yet if hundreds or thousands of Spaniards in Madrid, or Americans in New York, are massacred, their stone-cold hearts feel nothing. When Dutchman filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was silenced by an Islamic assassin, Muslim leaders so concerned with accommodation and tolerance suggest he brought such misfortune upon himself by insulting the Qur’an. These sensitive, socially concerned Muslims tell us no one is allowed to criticize the Qur’an or Islam. Apparently free speech refers only the right of Muslims to preach bigotry and hatred, but any right to free speech must remain subservient to Islamic hyper-sensitivity to criticism. Pious Muslims tell us that critics of the teachings or person of Muhammad are blasphemers who have lost their right to live. Obviously the word ‘tolerant’ does not mean the same thing to both Muslims and Westerners. As Dorothy said in the Wizard of Oz; "I don’t think were in Kansas anymore, Toto".

[Bhakta Don Muntean 0]

 

There could be some truth to the story of archangel Lucifer when he depressed and poutful left the eternal kingdom of God. In the Garden of Eden there was Adam and Eve and by Lucifer's influence Cain took birth from Eve, actually Lucifer's son. With the descendants of Cain, the demons became established on planet earth:

tat sadhu manye 'sura-varya dehinam

sada samudvigna-dhiyam asad-grahat

hitvatma-patam grham andha-kupam

vanam gato yad dharim asrayeta

Prabhupada: "My dear father..." And his father was materialist. Therefore materialists are called in Sanskrit language, asura. Asura. There are two kinds of human being all the time: asura and deva. Deva means human beings who are connected with the Supreme Lord. Their life is for realization of the Supreme Truth. They are called deva. Just like in higher planets, there are also living beings. They are called devatas, demigods, because their magnitude of pleasure is far, far greater than ours. But because they do everything in relation with the Supreme Lord, therefore they are called devatas, devata. Devata means demigods. And asura. Asura means just the opposite. They simply enjoy life for the matter of sense pleasure. That's all. So those who are interested in sense pleasure, they are called asuras, and those who are interested in unending spiritual pleasure, they are called devatas. Devata and asura does not mean that asuras are very ugly and devatas are very beautiful. Even the ugly man can become a devata, or even a beautiful man may become asura. That is due to his mentality. Because, after all, the soul is pure. When he is in unnatural condition of life, wants to enjoy simply the material senses, he becomes asura. So asura can be turned into devata. There is no hindrance...."

There could be some truth to the story of archangel Lucifer when he depressed and poutful left the eternal kingdom of God. In the Garden of Eden there was Adam and Eve and by Lucifer's influence Cain took birth from Eve, actually Lucifer's son. With the descendants of Cain, the demons became established on planet earth

Hari Bolo!

Dear Suchandra:

You don't still think there was a literal Lucifer/Satan?

We have seen a great deal of evidence which clearly shows this character as a fictional being. He is not even interpreted as a literal reality by Rabbi's - of course we've been over this point - that this myth is Persian in origin.

Of course as allegory it has a wealth of meaning - but if taken in the literal sense - it becomes maya.

Part of the issue is that we must see that in fact God has no rival.

That means that there isn't some 'spirit' opposite to Him - especially in terms of some fallen angel. Sure many 'spirits' oppose God - but they are not operating as rivals - they're just illusioned.

We can see from Vedic narrations that some souls - like Hiranyakasipu can oppose God and become very powerfull - he became so powerfull that he forced everyone to worship him - [except Siva and Brahma and of course Vishnu] - imagine such a demon today!

If there were such a demon today people would call him satan and antichrist - no doubt about it.

We can see that in his case and - in the case of all the 'spirits' that oppose God and torment other living entities - such rebel souls are checked by God [either directly or indirectly] at some point.

So let's know that there is NO satan and NO lucifer - but there is a personality of kali and 'it' comes closer to our understanding of a satan.

Let's try to understand the real personality of kali instead of this fictional satan.

YS,

BDM

[krsna 3]

 

<HR>

D.C. Watson

2006/03/20 <?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O /><O:P></O:P>

Recently, Parvez Ahmed, Chairman of the Council on American Islamic Relations wrote an op-ed column in the San Francisco Chronicle entitled "Dubai Ports Fallout Islamophobia on the rise" <O:P></O:P>

From his column: "The recent hysteria surrounding the approval of a <?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = ST1 /><ST1:CITY w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">Dubai</ST1:PLACE> </ST1:CITY>firm to manage parts of several American ports demonstrates how fear of Islam, or "Islamophobia," can overpower rational discourse and harm our nation's true interests." <O:P></O:P>

"Indications of how politicians from both major parties were able to exploit the <ST1:CITY w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">Dubai</ST1:PLACE> </ST1:CITY>ports deal appear in two new polls on attitudes toward Islam. These troubling poll results should serve as a wake-up call for all Americans who value our nation's traditions of religious tolerance and who seek to improve our sagging image in the Muslim world." <O:P></O:P>

Troubling poll results? <O:P></O:P>

Like this one?<O:P> </O:P>

Negative Perception Of Islam Increasing <O:P></O:P>

Sorry, Ahmed, but the protection and security of the American people comes first. Sorry if we Americans have failed to be gullible enough to believe that opposites always attract. And, in the case of Islam and Western culture, it just isn't working out. <O:P></O:P>

If you and your associates can't understand why more and more people are waking up and finally realizing that the 'religion of peace and tolerance' isn't so peaceful, or tolerant, I've included a few examples that should demonstrate to you that if you truly believe that Americans are afraid of anything, let alone Islam, you really don't know us at all, and you really never will. Americans aren't fearful of Islam. Fed up with it may be a more fitting description: <O:P></O:P>

September 11, 2001

U.S.S. Cole bombing

U.S. Embassy bombings in <ST1:COUNTRY-REGION w:st="on">Tanzania</ST1:COUNTRY-REGION> and <ST1:COUNTRY-REGION w:st="on">Kenya</ST1:COUNTRY-REGION>

<ST1:CITY w:st="on">Beirut</ST1:CITY>

WTC bombing 1993

<ST1:PLACE w:st="on"><ST1:PLACENAME w:st="on">Khobar</ST1:PLACENAME> <ST1:PLACETYPE w:st="on">Towers

Beheadings of American citizens<O:P> </O:P>

Kidnappings of American women<O:P> </O:P>

Hundreds of Muslims in the <ST1:COUNTRY-REGION w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">United States</ST1:PLACE> </ST1:COUNTRY-REGION>, involved in terrorist related activities, have been arrested, indicted, convicted, deported, are on the run, or are now deceased. <O:P></O:P>

Several Muslim "Charities" in the United States: Shut down for funneling "donations" to terrorist networks.<O:P> </O:P>

Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, a Muslim born in <ST1:COUNTRY-REGION w:st="on">Iran</ST1:COUNTRY-REGION> , a current resident of <ST1:CITY w:st="on">Chapel Hill</ST1:CITY> , <ST1:STATE w:st="on">NC</ST1:STATE> , and recent UNC graduate, plows a rented SUV into a crowd of pedestrians at the UNC at <ST1:PLACE w:st="on">Chapel Hill</ST1:PLACE> , injuring nine people. Did his brakes go out? Did he fall asleep at the wheel? No. He stated that he was "seeking retribution for the treatment of Muslims around the world", and "to spread the will of Allah." <O:P></O:P>

Despite Saudi Prince bin Talal's attempt to hide the fact that the rioters in <ST1:COUNTRY-REGION w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">France</ST1:PLACE> </ST1:COUNTRY-REGION>were Muslims by prompting Fox News to change its news ticker from "Muslim riots" to "civil riots", the fact remains that the rioters were in fact, Muslims. And, and although these riots were supposed to have been over poverty and joblessness, the rioters were heard yelling 'Allahu Akbar.'<O:P> </O:P>

Ali Warrayat, a Muslim, and student at <ST1:PLACE w:st="on"><ST1:PLACENAME w:st="on">Arizona</ST1:PLACENAME> <ST1:PLACETYPE w:st="on">State</ST1:PLACETYPE> </ST1:PLACE>, with a Qur'an and a Palestinian flag in his trunk, rams his car through the doors of an Arizona Home Depot store, drives his car through the store to the section that stocks the flammable liquids, and sets it ablaze. Why? He was unhappy with his raise. Also noted in police statements was that Warrayat had referred to his religion on several occasions. <O:P></O:P>

A Muslim driver refuses to haul beer, and then sues his former employer after his insubordination got him fired.<O:P> </O:P>

Two Muslim firemen stationed in <ST1:STATE w:st="on">Florida</ST1:STATE> , their salaries paid for by <ST1:STATE w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">Florida</ST1:PLACE> </ST1:STATE>taxpayers, refuse to ride on a fire engine that was decorated with the Stars and Stripes." <O:P></O:P>

Ahmad Abdelmomen, a Muslim living in <ST1:PLACE w:st="on"><ST1:CITY w:st="on">Madison Heights</ST1:CITY> , <ST1:STATE w:st="on">Michigan</ST1:STATE> </ST1:PLACE>, is charged with assaulting his fifteen year old sister, breaking her back, and leaving her wheelchair bound. Why? Because she was dating a non-Muslim. She told her parents, who didn't bother to call a doctor because they felt the beating was justified. <O:P></O:P>

The Council on American Islamic Relations (that's you) calls for billboards in <ST1:STATE w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">California</ST1:PLACE> </ST1:STATE>deeming Osama bin Laden "the Sworn Enemy" to be removed. Why? For "being offensive to Muslims."<O:P> </O:P>

A female convert to Islam sues the Florida State Highway Department for not permitting her to keep her face covered in her driver license photo. <O:P></O:P>

Muslim cab drivers ignore posted signs prohibiting anyone from exiting their vehicles in restricted areas, lay out their prayer mats and pray, are ticketed, and then are upset about the tickets. <O:P></O:P>

Muslim workers walk off the job at Dell over prayer time. <O:P></O:P>

A Muslim, and company Vice-President files, and loses "wrongful termination" lawsuit against Advanced Micro Devices Inc. <O:P></O:P>

Lina Morales, a non-Muslim, and an administrative assistant at a Florida company with Muslim ties, was fired for eating a bacon, lettuce and tomato sandwich in the lunchroom. <O:P></O:P>

Americans are being falsely accused of committing 'anti-Muslim' hate crimes by Muslims and Islamic groups. In these cases, investigation by law enforcement revealed that the crimes, including arson and fire bombings, had either been committed by the Muslims who had reported them, or there was no evidence that a crime was committed at all. <O:P></O:P>

"We must not forget that Allah's rules have to be established in all lands..." ~ Imam Muzammil H. Siddiqi, Islamic Society of North America<O:P> </O:P>

"Ultimately we can never be full citizens of this country. . . because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country" ~ Ihsan Bagby. <O:P></O:P>

"To permit Islam to attain its rightful place requires that the ideology of Islam prevail over the mental horizon of the American peopl" ~ Shamim A. Siddiqi <O:P></O:P>

"Islam isn't in <ST1:COUNTRY-REGION w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">America</ST1:PLACE> </ST1:COUNTRY-REGION>to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran "¦should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth" ~ Omar Ahmad, Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). <O:P></O:P>

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future." ~ Ibrahim Hooper, (CAIR). <O:P></O:P>

"The first principle is that terrorism, and terrorism alone, is the path to liberation. . . . If what they mean by jihad is terrorism, then we are terrorists." ~ Fawaz Damra, Convicted Imam, <ST1:STATE w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">Ohio</ST1:PLACE> </ST1:STATE><O:P></O:P>

"Muslims cannot accept the legitimacy of the secular system in the United States, for it "is against the orders and ordainments of Allah . . . the orientation of the Qur'an pushes us in the exact opposite direction as the forces that are at work in the American political spectrum." ~Zaid Shakir, former Muslim chaplain at Yale.<O:P> </O:P>

Do you feel like you're swimming upstream? You should. Americans didn't create such a negative perception of Islam, Muslims did. From a public relations standpoint, working for CAIR must be simply dreadful right about now. What a mess your co-religionists have left you with. Good luck trying to mop it up.<O:P>

</O:P></ST1:PLACETYPE></ST1:PLACE>

[Kulapavana 0]

Again:

"Why are there no ISKCON temples in Saudi Arabia???"

there are no Iskcon temples in many large US towns either. what is your excuse for that?

[krsna 3]

The question posed is there because in Saudi Arabia it is forbidden to practice any religion save and except the official state religion of Wahabism Islam. Is it not?

 

The option to open an ISKCON temple in Saudi is not available at this time whereas in the USA any good soul can open a temple for the pleasure of Guru and Gouranga.

 

So the real question is why is it that this ISLAM is not allowing freedom of practicing religion?

 

There is a major fault here but because of fear of sounding politically incorrect we choose not to address the major defect of Islam religion.

[ng dasa 0]

 

There is a major fault here but because of fear of sounding politically incorrect we choose not to address the major defect of Islam religion.

Not all Islam can be stereotyped like this, comparing all Islam to the more extreme forms you are pointing out in this thread.

Recently I had a short dialogue with some Sufi's, and I found them very open to my differing faith, it was such a nice encounter. I actually looked up their internet site and was quite surprised. Many things they were saying were very similar to what I have learned from the Hare Krsna movement.

Sufi Islam for example is an esoteric tradition, much like our movement has many esoteric qualities. The Sufi ability to extract the "essence" from their scriptures is very nice. After studying their website I actually felt inspired, for a deeper appreciation of our own practices and love for Mahaprabhu.

[Guest guest]

 

Not all Islam can be stereotyped like this, comparing all Islam to the more extreme forms you are pointing out in this thread.

Recently I had a short dialogue with some Sufi's, and I found them very open to my differing faith, it was such a nice encounter. I actually looked up their internet site and was quite surprised. Many things they were saying were very similar to what I have learned from the Hare Krsna movement.

Sufi Islam for example is an esoteric tradition, much like our movement has many esoteric qualities. The Sufi ability to extract the "essence" from their scriptures is very nice. After studying their website I actually felt inspired, for a deeper appreciation of our own practices and love for Mahaprabhu.

All glories to the sufis.

 

However,We are not atalking about the esoteric branches of Islamic tradition. Here we see everday the violation of basic spiritual rights of the human being:

 

*********************************************

 

Afghan on trial for Christianity

The trial judge holds the bible he says belonged to the accused

An Afghan man is being tried in a court in the capital, Kabul, for converting from Islam to Christianity.

Abdul Rahman is charged with rejecting Islam and could face the death sentence under Sharia law unless he recants.

 

He converted 16 years ago as an aid worker helping refugees in Pakistan. His estranged family denounced him in a custody dispute over his two children.

 

It is thought to be Afghanistan's first such trial, reflecting tensions between conservative clerics and reformists.

 

 

Conservatives still dominate the Afghan judiciary four years after the Taleban were overthrown.

 

The BBC's Mike Donkin in Kabul says reformists, like the government under President Hamid Karzai, want a more liberal, secular legal system but under the present constitution it is hard for them to intervene.

 

'Tolerance'

 

Afghanistan's post-Taleban constitution is based on Sharia law, and prosecutors in the case says this means Abdul Rahman, whose trial began last Thursday, should be put to death.

 

We will ask him if he has changed his mind. If so we will forgive him

 

Trial judge Ansarullah Mawlazezadah

 

When he was arrested last month he was found to be carrying a bible and charged with rejecting Islam which is punishable by death in Afghanistan.

 

Trial judge Ansarullah Mawlazezadah told the BBC that Mr Rahman, 41, would be asked to reconsider his conversion, which he made while working for a Christian aid group in Pakistan.

 

"We will invite him again because the religion of Islam is one of tolerance. We will ask him if he has changed his mind. If so we will forgive him," the judge told the BBC on Monday.

 

But if he refused to reconvert, then his mental state would be considered first before he was dealt with under Sharia law, the judge added.

 

He said he expected the case to take about two months to be heard.

 

Precedent

 

The Afghan Human Rights Commission has called for a better balance in the judiciary, with fewer judges advocating Sharia law and more judges with a wider legal background.

 

Several journalists have been prosecuted under blasphemy laws in post-Taleban Afghanistan.

 

The editor of a women's rights magazine was convicted of insulting Islam and sentenced to death last year - but was later released after an apology and heavy international pressure.

 

Mr Karzai's office says the president will not intervene in the case.

 

Observers say executing a converted Christian would be a significant precedent as a conservative interpretation of Sharia law in Afghanistan.

 

But it would also outrage Western nations which put Mr Karzai in power and are pouring billions of dollars into supporting the country.

[krsna 3]

Is this only militant Islamic religion or is it inherent natural quality of the 'peaceful and tolerant ISLAM'???

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4823874.stm

[krsna 3]

<HR>By Jacob Thomas

2006/03/21

Early in 2006, I discovered a relatively new Arabic web site: www. kwtanweer.com

It originates in Kuwait, and its goal, as its name Tanweer (Enlightenment) implies, is to provide a forum for the discussion of such topics as Religion & Modernity, Civil Society, Democracy, Human Rights, and Women’s place and role in society.

The subjects discussed in this forum are intriguing, as most of them would be considered avant-garde by an average Muslim. What catches my attention in my frequent perusal of the articles on this site are the readers’ comments. They tend to be very negative, and annoyed by any suggestion of changes in the status quo!

I would like to share with you an article with this title: Inkar (Denial). The author dealt with the topic of denial as a characteristic of the Islamic Mind. Years ago, I read books that dealt with the Arab Mind, but to my knowledge I have not noticed any book dealing with this larger topic such as the Islamic Mind. Even though, I would regard V. S. Naipaul’s books, An Islamic Journey, and Beyond Belief, as attempts to fathom and describe this mind.

The writer goes by the name of Ahmad al-Baghdadi; I presume that he is a Kuwaiti, but of an Iraqi background. He began with these lines:

Dr. Kamel al-Najjar, a respected author now living securely in the West, wrote an article published on the Internet dealing with the Crisis of the Islamic Mind. What he meant was the mind of Muslims and not of Islam, as a faith.

This crisis manifests itself as a serious illness besetting Muslims nowadays, namely their persistent denial of their lack of progress in the fields of scientific and human endeavors. At the same time, they keep on claiming that they are God’s best people; thus, justifying their mistakes or ignoring them in a rather shockingly naïve manner.

Everyone is aware of this lack of progress. The solution for this chronic illness requires an acknowledgement of this denial, in the same way as Dr. al-Najjar requires alcoholics, or drug addicts seeking healing, to acknowledge their condition, and confess publicly their desire for a cure. It is only after such a confession takes place that the treatment for the cure of an addict begins. On the other hand, as long as an alcoholic or a drug addict refuses to acknowledge the seriousness and reality of his condition, he is bound to continue in his substance abuse. People around him notice the results of his addiction, in spite of the fact that he persists in his denial.

Today, the Arabs’ failures are noticeable everywhere: in education, in economics, in politics, in culture, in administration, in technology, in manufacturing, and in human relations. If it were not for the mercy of God and the existence of the West, the Arabs would have perished, as their life expectancy would not have exceeded thirty years. [They should thank] the West that provides them with the necessities of life: such as food, medicines, technology, as well as university training for those fortunate Arabs [who manage to enter Western universities.]

And regardless of this evident lack of progress, we find Arabs taking a stand against intellectual pursuits, civil liberties, and science. They neither control the present, nor the future; all they possess is a past that ceased to exist around five hundred years ago. In other words, they glory in a culture that is no more!

Just as a car does not move without fuel, so is the condition of human civilizations; their fuel is liberty and democracy. Arabs refuse both. But they insist on claiming that they love freedom, intellectual life, and culture; while they keep on playing a broken record that proclaims the West’s indebtedness to the Islamic civilization. This is the apex of delusion!

Today, Arabs are in need of a quick medicine that would end their addiction to a dead past, and allow them to start a new life. This will not happen, as Dr. al-Najjar pointed out, unless they are ready to confess publicly their backwardness. This is the first step. The next step is the search for a cure. The prescription is ready and available from the American doctor: freedom and democracy.

That gifted Arab essayist Adonis once wrote: “A society that places at the top of the pyramid of its national concerns a policy of an oppressive security, and makes it the custodian for the conduct of politics, is in the process of self-destruction. There is no such thing as security without a security that guarantees freedom and democracy. Any Arab regime that arrests a citizen on account of his thoughts or opinions is arresting not merely one citizen, but an entire country. And a government that sends a citizen to prison for his thoughts is actually incarcerating itself.”

The Arabs today are living in the prison of their past, and the key to the gate of that prison is lost. What’s needed is the destruction of the gate itself, so that they may get out and experience freedom. Therefore we must destroy the shackles of that imaginary history that causes us to indulge in claiming a spurious greatness. We need to learn the lessons of history. Sometimes, however, we deny these lessons in the name of religion; other times in the name of Arab nationalism. Such denials lead to the death of any attempt for progress. So as long as Arabs cling to their concept of history with all its deceptions without attempting to separate truth from falsehood, facts from fiction, they will continue in their present state for ever.

These words of al-Baghdadi are strong medicine. They must express the exasperation of several Arab and Muslim intellectuals who are fed up with the status quo. The Internet allows them to utter such words which are regarded as extreme by the very people who need them the most.

Unfortunately the counter-denials pour into the web site. I was very disappointed by one response from a person who lives in Kuwait, the home of the Enlightenment site. I hesitate to share it with you. This is what he wrote, not only condemning the author of “Denial,” but all, yes all the contributors to Tanweer. Unfortunately, there are many like him who prefer to live within the prison of the past, because they are unwilling to acknowledge their addiction to a mythical view of Islamic history.

Mr. Badr (full-moon, as his Arabic name means,) shot back at the article with these shocking words:

Half of those contributing to this web site should be sent to prison, and the other half, should be confined to mental hospitals.

What a pity that a civilization that persists in denial, and prefers darkness to light!

[krsna 3]

Why Sharia Law must be Opposed

Sharia law is the instrument by which Political Islam seeks to control the Muslim world. Whilst the Sharia may have been inspired by the Holy Quran, it has developed and evolved through time and through the efforts of men. The Sharia should be open to analysis, research and criticism like any other system of law, practice and belief. Its divine inspiration should no more shield it from criticism than Christianity should have been spared criticism for burning heretics or massacring unbelievers. The more pernicious interpretations of the Sharia today fall far short of the minimum standards of justice widely demanded by the international community and by Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

The Sharia should be opposed for its imposition of theocracy over democracy, its abuse of human rights, its institutionalized discrimination, its denial of human dignity and individual autonomy, its punishment of alternative lifestyle choices, and for the severity of its punishments.

In the west, in countries that have a sizable Muslim population, there have been calls for the Sharia to be adopted for the Muslim community. These calls should be vigorously opposed; the Sharia conflicts with many basic human values, such as equality before the law, that punishments should be commensurate with the crime, and that the law must be based on the will of the people. The Sharia as it developed in the first few centuries of Islam incorporated many pre-Islamic Middle-Eastern misogynist and tribal customs and traditions. The Sharia was developed not only from the Holy Quran but incorporates legal principles from other sects. We may ask how a law whose elements were first laid down over 1,000 years ago can possibly be relevant in the 21st century. The Sharia reflects the social and economic conditions at the time of the Abbasids and has become further and further out of touch with later social, economic, technological, cultural and moral developments. The principles of the Sharia are inimical to moral progress, humanity and civilized values.

The problem for all of us is how to oppose the violations of human rights inherent in the Sharia without being accused of blasphemy or apostasy. We would suggest that the answer lies in a return to the Five Pillars of Islam.

For non-Muslims who want to help, the problem is how to avoid charges of cultural imperialism, neocolonialism and racism, or of failing to respect “the other”. But cultural relativism is not the answer. In India, each religion has its own social laws. Muslim women do not enjoy the same rights as Hindu women. Why not? Justice cries out for secularism. One law for all – equality before the law – for Muslims and non-Muslims, for men and women alike, must be the answer.

Many of the arguments for permitting each religion or culture to determine its own laws are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of human rights. Human rights as defined in the UDHR are vested in the individual, not the group. As soon as rights are accorded to a group rather than to individuals, conflict becomes possible not only between one group and another, but between the group and its own members. Any group that denies the right of its members to leave is in contravention of one of the most fundamental principles of human rights. Yet clearly, one of the reasons for the growth of Islam over the past century has been that becoming a Muslim is a one-way street. Whether by birth or conversion (historically likely to have been a forced conversion) once you are a Muslim the only way out, under the Sharia, is death.

When Political Islam really does advocate jihad to achieve world domination, then anyone deeply concerned with humanity and human rights will be critical. Of all the existing ideologies, Political Islam remains the greatest danger to humanity. Political Islam has been neither tamed nor moderated by progressive forces. It has the power to inspire the terrorist mind, and, through its ties to oil-rich states, the funds to pursue its plans.

Islamic apologists often claim that many so-called violations of human rights are based on a misreading of the Holy Quran and will quote this or that sura in its defense. But the arguments against Political Islam are not against the holy texts but against the Sharia as it is practiced today in Islamic states. We are told that Islam is a religion of peace and that the struggle, jihad, to impose Islam by conquest is not to be taken literally. But for Political Islam it is. Ask the suicide bombers. The only possible response to the charge of misunderstanding or misreading Islam is to look at the reality of what is happening in those countries such as Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and northern Nigeria where the Sharia now holds sway.

The world is a battleground of social movements and ideas. It took people in the west over 400 years of often-bloody struggle to gain the right to criticize Christianity. Even now, that right is still not fully recognized. In Britain, for example, there is still a law against blasphemy, and many Islamic clerics have argued that it should be extended to cover Islam as well. It should be scrapped. Once we are prevented from expressing our point of view in the market place of ideas we will be heading back to the Dark Ages.

We must recognize that we now live in a global community. Society is far larger, more diverse and far more complex than the primitive tribal society of 7th century Arabia that gave birth to Islam. It is time to renounce the idea that anyone should be ruled exclusively by the Sharia. More than ever before, people need a secular state that respects freedom of religion, and freedom from religion for those that have none, and human rights founded on the principle that power belongs to the people. This means that we must reject the claims of the Islamists that sovereignty belongs exclusively to Allah – by which they mean His representatives, that is, themselves. Indeed it demands that the very concept of an Islamic state be challenged. The imposition of Sharia law for political ends must be opposed.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

So the real question is why is it that this ISLAM is not allowing freedom of practicing religion?

There is a major fault here but because of fear of sounding politically incorrect we choose not to address the major defect of Islam religion.

Vrndavana, March 15, 1974

 

Prabhupada: ...you should call learned. Arcye visnau sila-dhir gurusu nara-matir vaisnave jati-buddhih. You take it...

Nitai: Yes.

Prabhupada: ...this quotation from Padma Purana, and distribute it by transcribing to all our devotees.

Nitai: That's the verse that says that one is a resident of hell...

Prabhupada: Yes. Naraki.

Nitai: ...if he considers the Deity...

Prabhupada: Naraki.

Nitai: Yes.

Prabhupada: Arcye visnau... (break) ...when it will teach military art, with tilaka, soldiers will, "Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna..." (laughter) We want that. Marching with military band, "Hare Krsna." You maintain this idea. Is it not good?

Hrdayananda: Yes, Prabhupada.

Prabhupada: When there will be military march of Krsna conscious soldiers. Anyone who does not believe in Krsna, "Blam!" (laughter) Yes. The same process as the Mohammedans did, with sword and Koran, we'll have to do that. "Do you believe in Krsna or not?No, sir.Blam!" Finished. (laughter, Prabhupada laughs) What do you think, Madhudvisa Maharaja? Is that all right?Madhudvisa: Yes.

Prabhupada: (laughing) What these communists can do? We can do better than them. We can kill many communists like that. (laughter) Then it will be counteraction of communist movement. And you think like that. "Why you are sitting idly, no employment? Come on to the field! Take this plow! Take this bull. Go on working. Why you are sitting idly?" This is Krsna consciousness movement. Nobody should be allowed to sit down and sleep. They must find out some employment, either work as brahmana or as a ksatriya or as a vaisya. Why there should be unemployment? The same example. Just like I am, this body is working. The leg is working, hand is working, brain is working, belly is working. Why there should be unemployment? You just stop this unemployment, you will see the whole world is peaceful. There is no complaint. And they'll very happily chant Hare Krsna. Hm? Nobody's working in this field. They're all drawn to the cities to work in the factory. Condemned civilization. That communist emblem, what is that?

Devotees: Hammer and sickle.

Prabhupada: Yes. That is good.

Indian: Yeah, good.

Prabhupada: But no hammer. Only this... What is called?

Devotees: Sickle.

Prabhupada: No hammer. That will be our emblem. Only sickle. Not hammer. The hammer has hammered the whole human civilization. So just make a counter-emblem. The communists will appreciate.

Devotee: Sickle and tilaka.

Prabhupada: Eh?

Devotee: A sickle, and then a tilaka.

Prabhupada: Yes, that is good idea."<!--QuoteEnd-->

[krsna 3]

Kula is Kool !

 

 

1. "Hazrat Muhammad, the inaugurator of the Islam religion, I accept him as an empowered servant of God because he preached God-consciousness in those parts of the world and induced them to accept the authority of God. He is accepted as the servant of God and we have all respect for him."? ( Letter, 2-4-1976)

 

2. So therefore, by that symptom, we accept Lord Jesus Christ as Saktyaves avatara, or Hazrat Muhammad, he's also. Because these two religious leaders of the world, they preached about the glorification of the Supreme Lord. And they sacrificed everything for preaching the glories of the Lord. Therefore... And their influence and their followers, there are... These are the symptoms by which we can understand that Jesus Christ and Hazrat Muhammad was, were Saktyaves avataras. ( CC Madhya-lila 20.367-84)

 

3. "Vedas means the books of transcendental knowledge. Not only the Bhagavad Gita, even the Bible or the Quran, they are also."? (lecture 29-7-68) 4. Srila Prabhupada:No, no. Christianity is Vaisnavism.

 

Dr. Patel: Vaisnavism? Absolutely Vaisnavism.

 

Srila Prabhupada:Islam is also Vaisnavism.

 

Dr. Patel: Mohammedanism is not Vaisnavism.

 

Srila Prabhupada:No, no. Caitanya Mahaprabhu had talked with the Pathanas.

 

He proved that "Your religion is Vaisnavism."? (February 17, 1974, Bombay) 5. "Chaitanya Mahaprabhu proved devotional service from the Quran.

 

So, it requires a devotee who can explain God from any Godly literature"? ( Morning Walk, June 6, 1974, Geneva)

 

6. "Then Islam is Vaishnava dharma in a crude form like christianty."?(room conversation, Tehran 14-3-75)

 

7. They accept God. They are also our brothers because they accept God. They are not atheist. Atheist don't accept God. "there is no God"? say the atheist.

 

But here they are theists. They accept God. They want to please God. They go to the church, go to mosques, offer prayers. Prayers is also bhakti, devotional service. The Christian way or the Muslim way is to offer prayer. The Muslims offer obeisences & offer prayer. So that is also Bhakti (devotion). The Christians also do that, so that is also bhakti. And they accept God; We accept God. So there is no difference. But the only point is who is that God. ( room conversation, Tehran 14-3-75) So you can see what is our mission, simply to try and increase our attraction and their attraction to the Supreme personality of Godhead, Lord Sri Krsna & help them to develop further attachment to Krsna and loving service unto Krsna (Bhakti yoga). What process they choose to follow, like Prabhupada we should leave upto each individual to decide for themselves without any tinge of label, bodily identification (you must join my group) rubbish.

 

Krsna Himself says: "Thus I have explained to you knowledge still more confidential. Deliberate on this fully, and then do what you wish to do"? Bhagavad Gita 18-63.

 

"?My mission is not turn any one from the affiliation of a particular religion but I want to let them know more knowledge about God and devotion."? 6-11-1965, (letters) Srila Prabhupada.

 

"Actually, we are not teaching a particular type of faith. We are teaching the post graduate studies of all religions:we are teaching people how to love God and who is the man that will deny this principle?"? 5-12-68, Srila Prabhupada.

[Kulapavana 0]

Prabhupada: When there will be military march of Krsna conscious soldiers. Anyone who does not believe in Krsna, "Blam!" (laughter) Yes. The same process as the Mohammedans did, with sword and Koran, we'll have to do that. "Do you believe in Krsna or not?No, sir.Blam!" Finished. (laughter, Prabhupada laughs) ....Vrndavana, March 15, 1974

 

so... how tolerant, do you think, would be a state ruled by Iskcon? better or worse than Saudi Arabia?