>Also, notice the reaction to the latest group of psychos that got caught in saudi?? the headlines suggested that the terrorists plans were IN the "holy city" itself. that smacks of heresy to the rest of the moon-god worshippers. civil war in islam? oh happy days. Let them kill each other off. less for us to finish off later.< If only it were so. Muslims have been conducting terror operations against Meccans since the 7th Century. The basic premise in reforming Islam away from the interpretations of the Wahabbis is flawed. My studies of both Islamic texts and Islamic history suggests that the bloody, violent outbursts against "enemies of Islam" enshrined by the Wahabbis is PRECISELY the correct application of Islam, as it was understood by its founder Muhammad. Trying to reform Islam away from being a repugnant, violent religion is very much like trying to reform diarrhea away from being liquid excrement.

Statements like this ... "Trying to reform Islam away from being a repugnant, violent religion is very much like trying to reform diarrhea away from being liquid excrement." I was gonna respond, but there is no point. Either experience or a bullet will solve the problem.

"I was gonna respond, but there is no point. Either experience or a bullet will solve the problem." The problem being what? The religion with a 1400+ year old history confirming its ideology of violence, or my absolute disdain for it? Fundamentalism simply means strict adherence to a religious text. Thus, those that strictly adhere to the Koran, the fundamentalist Muslims, are those who are the most prone to barbaric acts of violence and justifying the same. If I'm missing something positive in Islam, in all the bloody calls for the death of Americans and Jews, in all the violent commandments in the Koran and Hadiths, in all the histories of atrocities committed (and in many cases, introduced) by the spread of Islam across the globe, in "mainstream" Muslim Student Association websites complete with links to Al Qaeda apologists and recruiters, in Islamic charities found to be actively funneling money to terror groups foresworn to killing my countrymen, in translations of Arabic newspapers, webpages, religious sermons, textbooks, and other cultural media that bear more than striking resemblances to the most violent and insane ramblings of Adolf Hitler himself, if I've missed anything positive about Islam in all of that, please, for dear sake, inform the world. We'd like to know.

You ears can't hear if your mouth is open. (wonder if that should be your eyes can't read if your fingers are typing?)

Shaka, Do you ever have anything relevant to say? Ever? Just curious.

Give me a reasonable topic for debate, we can debate. Spew garbage, then don't complain when trash hits you.

"Give me a reasonable topic for debate, we can debate." How about the topic we're on? I say the bloody, violent, intolerance of the Wahabbi sect is the closest thing to Muhammad's version of Islam we have today. What says you?

I'd say that your statement does nothing more than imply that Islam is a "bloody, violent and intolerant" religion. Wahabbi sect is not Islam. And even if it appears close to the original interpetation, what has that got to do with what Islam is today? Want to take the vote away from women because they never had it in the original constitution? Its bad enough that most Americans are ignorant of the outside world. But statements like yours do nothing more than promote that ignorance. Thats what I say.

Gentlemen, Gentlemen. Why fight each other. Incidentally: Taking away womens vote is not such a bad idea. Only my wife doesn't think it is a good idea - so I better propose it.

>I'd say that your statement does nothing more than imply that Islam is a "bloody, violent and intolerant" religion.< Imply? More like identify. At NO point in the entire history of Islam has it not been a bloody, violent, intolerant religion. When we talk of reforming Islam away from these tendencies, something we all want but have little chance to do from the outside, we're talking about neutering the very things that define Islam's core values and historical preoccupation. What would become of Islam if all the commandments to direct violence towards non-Muslims in the cause of converting them to Islam or placing them under the authority of Islam were excised from the Koran? Besides reducing the book to a 4 page document? >Wahabbi sect is not Islam.< This is very much like saying Lenin is not a Marxist. In what way do you believe Wahabbism diverges from the core teachings of Muhammad? >And even if it appears close to the original interpetation, what has that got to do with what Islam is today?< Because the more and more Muslims dedicate themselves to practicing Islam the way Muhammad intended, the more terrorism we're going to have to deal with, at least until the terrorists win and the entire world is ruled by Islam. >Want to take the vote away from women because they never had it in the original constitution?< Why would I want to do that? Wahabbism seeks to strictly follow the teachings of Muhammad. It's hard to argue, from the Koran, or from the history of Islam, that they've gotten their interpretation wrong.