9 1 1

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Cindy Glass:
Religion is not about HOW YOU WORSHIP, but What and WHY you worship.

You mean

Originally posted by Ravish:
If you are worshiping any God, it does not matter [qb]how[qb] are you doing it

And I think, in all religion we worship for same reason.

[Michael Ernest]

Speaking as a believer in no particular line of religious thought, I'm far more inclined to find God in the spirit with which people treat each other every day. Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Jew, Buddhist -- if I believe anything, I believe that no one of these forms "matters" in the grand scheme, if there is a grand scheme.
Religion itself to me is not the thing to fear, but passion and beliefs unchecked by knowledge and reason:
Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say the world will end in ice.
From what I've tasted of desire,
I hold with those who favor fire.
But from what I have seen of hate,
I know too that ice
is also great
And would suffice.

[R K Singh]

I dont believe in religion, cause I think all are same more OR less.
But I do believe in God, coz I dont know reasons for lot of things. AW I think we already had that debate in some thread.
so thread is over now.

[Anonymous]

Hi Friends,
Nobody could support a act of terrorism whether 1
innocent die or 1 lakhs ,but terrorism could not be
crushed only by bigger terror act this time by govt
agencies. This is what is happening now all over the
world. USA,Isreal and India ...everywhere. To crush
terrorism from root you have to go to root .Nobody
tries to see the logic why some men leaves behind
there wife, children ,parents and take up gun.....when
everything of there is lost. Just see nobody could
support the act of Israel toward Palestine but USA is
constantly supporting it. If 9/11 is terror then
blasting a civilian plane in air just because that
happens to belong to Iran is also a terror.
Another thing I am noticing is that peoples are always
mixing Islam with Al Quida and terrorism.
I am sorry to say Islam is not a religion of terrorism
on contrary it is religion of peace and most
scientific one. Main philosophy of Islam is all human
being are same and above all of us is our
creator...Allah .May be this philosophy doesn't suit
the President of United States of America as he want
to be above everybody.
If you are thinking I am Muslim and I am in mission to
convert all Java Rancher to Islam then again you are
wrong because I am not Muslim but that doesn't stop me
looking at good points of Islam.
Bye
Myth Vs Truth

[Muhammad Asif]

The whole story ....
I hope the moderator doesnot delete it
[Well then, you probably shouldn't have posted it twice. And you should have at least edited out the "Stupid!" part before cutting and pasting it from wherever you got it. I left the other copy intact for those who wish to read it. - Jim]
[ September 19, 2002: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

[Axel Janssen]

Originally posted by Asif Abbasi:
The whole story ....

Hi Asif,
You must be God. Only God knows the whole story of 9 11.
[ September 19, 2002: Message edited by: Axel Janssen ]

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Axel Janssen:

Hi Asif,
You must be God.
[ September 19, 2002: Message edited by: Axel Janssen ]

[Axel Janssen]

Omar: I just wanted to express that for me it is quite presumptous to title this list with "the whole story". Especially facing the thousands victims.

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by <Myth Vs Truth>:
blah blah blah

When the US warship accidentally shot down an Iranian passenger plane, the US apologized. A camera crew happened to be on the US ship at the time. When the crew of the ship realized what they did they were physically ill. Many of them were crying. This was not an act of terror but a tragic mistake. The US has since paid reparations to the families and apologized to the government of Iran.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by <Myth Vs Truth>:
Nobody
tries to see the logic why some men leaves behind
there wife, children ,parents and take up gun

That's because there is usually very little logic behind it. There is often religion behind it though.

Just see nobody could
support the act of Israel toward Palestine

Which acts? The ones where they are trying to prevent Palestinian and Arab terrorism? Do you legitimize Palestinians deliberately targetting women and children for terrorist action?

If 9/11 is terror then
blasting a civilian plane in air just because that
happens to belong to Iran is also a terror.

The plane was thought to be military and was acting an odd manner for a commercial aircraft. It was a tragic mistake. Contributing to the problem was the fact that the plane took off from a combined military/civil facility, it did not reply to the seven warnings issued by the Vincennes, the Vincennes picked up transmissions they attributed to this aircraft on a military frequency, and the flight profile did not seem correct for a civil aircraft. We admitted the error, and have paid reparations to the families. If you remember at the time, although you might be too young, Iran was carrying out hostilities against US naval vessels and US flagged oil tankers in the Gulf, so tensions were already very high. The Iranians were launching missiles at US aircraft and navy vessels, attacking Kuwaiti and Saudi vessels and facilities, as well as laying mines in international waters. using missile patrol boats and mine laying vessels, so tensions were already very high. In addition, the USS Stark had been struck with two missiles from an Iraqi Mirage a year earlier. Tensions being what they were in what was a de facto war zone, it was only a matter of time before some tragedy occurred.

Another thing I am noticing is that peoples are always
mixing Islam with Al Quida and terrorism.

Nobody here has done that. Whenever the terrorist's religion is mentioned, there is always the caveat that it is there particular flavor of the religion, and nobody seems to believe that it is mainstream Islam.

[Anonymous]

Hi Jason
Your argument are very impressive but not very accurate.First it is
not only Palestine who are targeting women and children,it is Isreal security
force who are also targeting.They have illegally arrested the legally elected
president of a country.If their action are right then why USA have to use their
ultimate weapon "Veto" to save them everytime. Another fact now you are using
terrorist to denote Palestine people but before pre 1965 ,before state of
Israeli was created it was Israel peoples who are terrorist in eyes of USA and
UK. So we have to change the definition of terrorism when USA changes it.
Another fact at the time of downing of Iranian aircraft there was no tension
with Iran or Iraq.Actually then Iraq was great friend of USA. There was a
tension with Libya.So many years has passed but still everybody is wondering
how a warship fitted with all sophisticated radar system could not
differentiate a civilian plane from hostile plane when that was quite apparent
from naked eyes.About crying of crews many afganistan felt sad does that stop
US from attacking.Compensation paid......will victims of WTC will accept
compensation from Osama and forgive him.

Nobody here has done that. Whenever the terrorist's religion is mentioned, there is always the caveat that it is there particular flavor of the religion

I fully agree with you that most of us here are not directly talking about mainstream Islam,but that was quote are for quote like these

But its an Islam thing, no arab thing. Al Quaeda understands itself as a pan-islamic organization. There are arabs which aren't muslims (there are arab christs or arab jews). There were turkish members in the Hamburg terror cell under Mohamed Atta. Are pashtunes arabs (I don't think so)?

Bye
Myth Vs Truth

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by <Myth Vs Truth>:
blah blah blah

First it is not only Palestine who are targeting women and children,it is Isreal security force who are also targeting.
Israel is not targeting women and children. They are going after terrorists who hide behind women's skirts. But even if they were, would that justify blowing up buses? If you shoot my wife does that give me the right to kill your children?
Another fact now you are using terrorist to denote Palestine people but before pre 1965, before state of Israeli was created it was Israel peoples who are terrorist in eyes of USA and UK.
Please learn some history. The state of Israel was created in 1948. The US never accused Israelis of being terrorists.
But as long as you have such a grasp of history, perhaps you can answer this... since the West Bank was owned by Arabs for 20 years after the creation of Israel, why didn't the Arab nations make a Palestinian state?
Another fact at the time of downing of Iranian aircraft there was no tension with Iran or Iraq.
You do have a wonderful grasp of history. At the time, Iran and Iraq were at war. The US had been in the Persian Gulf protecting oil shipments. Iranian gunboats frequently attacked American vessels in the Gulf.
This is from news reports at the time:

The shootdown of the Airbus represents the biggest loss of life on the strategic waterway since the U.S. warships began escorting Kuwaiti tankers in and out of the Persian Gulf last July. Pentagon officials then said the increased U.S. naval presence would have from a "low to moderate risk" of provoking confrontations with Iran.
But in the past year, although the United States and Iran are not in a formal state of war, there have been a series of brief but fierce sea battles in the gulf between the two countries' military forces. Vigilance and readiness among U.S. forces intensified after the near-sinking of the patrol frigate USS Stark by an Iraqi fighter-bomber on May 17, 1987, in a missile attack that killed 37 sailors.
[30 minutes before the shooting down of the airliner] three Iranian Boghammar gunboats fired on a helicopter that had flown off the Vincennes on a reconnaissance mission. The helicopter flew back to the cruiser unscathed. The Vincennes and a smaller warship, the frigate USS Elmer Montgomery, a half-hour later closed on the gunboats and put them under fire with 5-inch guns, sinking two and damaging the third.

About crying of crews many afganistan felt sad does that stop US from attacking.
If the men on the ship had deliberately shot down a commercial ailrliner I doubt that they would have been crying and throwing up over the side of the ship.

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:

About crying of crews many afganistan felt sad does that stop US from attacking.
If the men on the ship had deliberately shot down a commercial ailrliner I doubt that they would have been crying and throwing up over the side of the ship.

First it is not only Palestine who are targeting women and children,it is Isreal security force who are also targeting.
Israel is not targeting women and children
I am still unable to know, how come when any bomb blast it knows that it has to kill only men??
Do Israel or Palestine use some algorith which makes sure that bullets will kill only man and blast wont kill any woman or child.

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by <Myth Vs Truth>:
I am sorry to say Islam is not a religion of terrorism
on contrary it is religion of peace and most
scientific one.

I think, ALL religions are totally orthogonal to science. Not that it is a wrong thing but the fact is they have nothing do with science. I for one, do not believe in any religion. The idea that I need a "broker" to reach God does not apeal to me. I do believe in God though. But I take my pleas to God directly. If they are unanswered, that is God's problem He's too busy anyway, so there is no way a broker can get them answered.
A religion is a "faith" based system. And as long as people understand this fact, it works great. But as soon as people start giving undue importance to it, they start becoming rigid and orthodox and fanatics.
Propagation of all "prophet" based religions has occured solely due to terrorism. Earlier their there were Christian crusaders who forcibly converted native populations to Chritianity. Same thing was done by Mohammedans. So they are no different basically. I guess, Islam is also following the same curve as Christianity although there is a time lag.
As far as preaching peace is concerned, all religions pay lip service to it. When the actual time of practicing peace comes, they waste no time in taking up arms. Well, that's us, humans

[Cindy Glass]

< aside >

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:
I think, ALL religions are totally orthogonal to science.

To the contrary, I think that God INVENTED science, and that he knew exactly what he was doing. It is just that WE do not understand all of the science.
A couple of hundred years ago science could not explain electricity. Therefore anything related to it was often chalked up to "magic" or voodoo or a "miracle of God".
I think that there is an explaination for everything including souls and what is beyond the end of the universe etc. WE just don't understand it yet.
(PS: God always answers prayers. It is just that the answer is sometimes "No" ).
< /aside >
That "time lag" theory is interesting. You think that this militant Islam stuff is just a growing phase? hmmmm . . . interesting thought. Hope that they outgrow it SOON!!

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by Cindy Glass:

To the contrary, I think that God INVENTED science, and that he knew exactly what he was doing. It is just that WE do not understand all of the science.

That is correct. I do not deny that at all. That's why I believe in God. What I am saying is "religion" is seldom based on science. It is based on faith. And Religion != God. The fact that religion does not explain so many things and the fact that science has proven so many religious things wrong, supports my premise that religions are not scientific.

A couple of hundred years ago science could not explain electricity. Therefore anything related to it was often chalked up to "magic" or voodoo or a "miracle of God".

Exactly, it was attributed to God, which is still true. Everything can be attribute to God. But religion does not explain anything. Science does (at least some of it.)

(PS: God always answers prayers. It is just that the answer is sometimes "No" ).

I agree with you. If you have faith, you get the answer. You don't need any mediator for that.

[R K Singh]

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:

What I am saying is "religion" is seldom based on science.

I beg your pardon but you are not correct here.
The only thing is that religion does not go for mathematical solution of the problem OR in your term does not give scientific proof.
There are religion where sleeping with head towards North is evil. And it has some mythological story also.
but Now when science says we are agree for that, you should sleep with head towards South.
And its just a one example.... you can find hundreds/thousands of them.
Intresting Na

The human body is considered to have an inherent polarity with the head acting as the North Pole. Thus if while sleeping, your head is directed towards the north, it will repel the field of the earth's pole. It is recommended to sleep with the head to the South.

[Cindy Glass]

Tracy, I see what you are getting at - yes alot of Religion goes beyond what science can prove at this point.
Ravish - you should use the Jewish kosher dietary laws as your example. Much of those are based on generations of medical observations on what causes health problems. There is in fact some science behind the religion. Course not enough to convince ME to not eat a beef and cheese buritto .

[Tracy Woo]

Ok,
what's the science behind sacrificing all sorts of animals just to please a God?
What's the science behind forcing all women to wear the veil?
What's the science behind wearing a skull cap?
What's the science behind shouting "Allah-o-Akbar" and that too amplified by loud speakers? (When Islam came into existance, there were no loud speakers, right?)
What's the science behind disallowing lower cast people to pray?
What's the science behind having a mediator to God?
And above all, what is the science behind forcing other people to convert to your religion???
I say, there is no science. There is only faith. Let me emphasise again, faith is not necessarily wrong BUT IT IS NOT SCIENCE. And for this reason, I think, when science starts to explain things, we should update our beliefs too. It is one thing to have faith/belief when you are ignorant or do not have power to do something. But it is stupid to stick to faith when science can explain things. For example, earlier people used to sacrifice animals to bring rains. It was their faith. But now they don't because now they know that it's simply stupid to do so. Their faith has changed.
God probabaly was pre-existing but religion is man made. And man kept on adding/updating stuff to religion to fulfill his desires. The practice of Pontiffs, Mullahs, and Priests is nothing but a way to control people. They are no nearer or farther to God and I am or you are.

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by Cindy Glass:
Tracy, I see what you are getting at - yes alot of Religion goes beyond what science can prove at this point.

And I have no problem in believing things that science doesn't explain (yet). Why do you think I believe in God

[Tracy Woo]

Ravish, My theory is really simple: Belive what is believable.
Religion says: Do no eat pork. Fine. I don't have a problem with that.
Religion says: Kill all the kafirs. Forget it. I'm not falling for that.
So the point is, apply your common sense.

[omar khan]

I think that Religion and Science are two different domains.
Religion reasoning cannot be applied to science and vice versa.
Much more interesting is the interaction between Religion and Science.
Some beliefs had a neutral effect on science, others an harmful effect others a beneficial effect.
Speaking about Religion vs. Science everybody knows that in the Bible, the Torah and Quran it is written that pork is impure (please note impure not unhealthy).
Why?
I used to think that it depended on the fact that Ebraism, Christianity and Islam where born in Middle East where it is hot and pork may cause illnesses.
So, why there is not written that we should not drink poison or jump out of the window, that is also very unhealthy?
The point is that for the believer eating pork is not harmful for the body but for the soul.
(This is not my insights but Mawdudi's, which is a theology scholar)
In other words it is very difficult to rationalise religion or to accept dogmas in science.
They are just two different domains.
The question is: can science explain everything?
I doubt it.

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:
Ravish, My theory is really simple: Belive what is believable.

Can you believe that there is life after death?
Have you got any proof?
Can you apply your common sense on this?

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:

Religion says: Kill all the kafirs.

What Religion?
Where exactly?

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by OMAR KHAN:

Can you believe that there is life after death?
Have you got any proof?
Can you apply your common sense on this?

Omar, where to apply common sense, is also a matter of common sense. Consider this:
Hinduism says: Do not eat beef but you can eat pork.
Islam says: Do not eat pork but you can eat beef.
Christianity says: You can eat both.
Obviously, only one of them can be right. Correct? Which one is it? why? There is no answer.
I am saying that for Hindu, eating pork is alright, for a Muslim, eating beef is alright and for a chritian, eating both is alright.
So, neither science explains it nor religion. Commonsense is the key.

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by OMAR KHAN:

What Religion?
Where exactly?

Hey, do not jump on me. I am just giving an example that religion is not always right. And this is a most "well known" catch line of Mullahs (if not Islam, per se).

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:

Omar, where to apply common sense, is also a matter of common sense.

This sadly is wishful thinking.
Are you aware of the existance of mirages?
What you see is not always the reality.
If you draw an analogy, what you believe is not always the truth.

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:

Hinduism says: Do not eat beef but you can eat pork.

I do not think this is correct.
Can any Hindu contribute?

Islam says: Do not eat pork but you can eat beef.

Islam does not say "do not eat pork". It simply warns mankind that pork is impure. That it is up to you to decide.
At least this is what I understood from studying Islam.

Obviously, only one of them can be right. Correct? Which one is it? why? There is no answer.

I agree. It is based on faith and not on science.

Commonsense is the key.

Commonsense in not the key.
Commonsense often makes you commit mistakes.

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:

Hey, do not jump on me.

I was only asking and innocent question, since I do not know any religion that says so.
You are probably referring to the following verses (Quran version by Pickthal)

2:190. Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.
2:191. And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.
2:192. But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

It is clear from the quote that Muslims are permitted to defend themselves but must not attack anybody.
So IMHO if anybody says that Muslims must kill infidels he is blatantly wrong.
[ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: OMAR KHAN ]

[Tracy Woo]

Any Hindu may coroborate it not but MacDonald's can definitely do so
(In case, you are unaware, MD was successfully sued by a group of Hindus for calling French Fries, that used Beef tallow, as vegetarian.)
Ok, let's assume Islam only says that Pork is impure. In US, beef as well as pork, both are reared in almost same way. Will you eat that pork? Why? Why not?

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by OMAR KHAN:

Commonsense in not the key.
Commonsense often makes you commit mistakes.

Omar, I have pointed out so many wrong beliefs present in religions in my previous (in support of my argument that religion is not always right and should be updated regularly) and you've not answered any of those. Neither you have you given ANY example in support of your argument.

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:
In US, beef as well as pork, both are reared in almost same way. Will you eat that pork? Why? Why not?

I will not knowingly eat pork as I consider pork impure. The fact that I considered pork impure is not based on the way it is reared, but on the fact that it is my personal religious (not scientific) belief.
I will eat beef as I do not consider it impure.
Again the fact that I consider it impure is not based on science but merely on my personal religious belief.
So I guess we are saying the same thing with different words.

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by OMAR KHAN:

It is clear from the quote that Muslims are permitted to defend themselves but must not attack anybody.
So IMHO if anybody says that Muslims must kill infidels he is blatantly wrong.

Yeah right. And how do you think Islam spread all accross the Asia?
As is now well known, Afghanistan was a Buddhist place. Who attacked those budhhists? How converted the Africans into Islam or Christianity. I dont accept that the hapless tribals went out of Africa to attack Saudi Arabia.

[Ashok Mash]

We all agree that there are opportunists, perverts, terrorists, cannibals and many other nasty types of people in this world, and sadly they all belong to one religion or other.
That doesn?t mean that the religion they follow and other innocent people who follow the same religion should be held responsible for that.
I am talking about branding all Muslims, Islamic terrorists or all Hindus are pork-munchers or against eating beef! Its as silly as branding all Christians child molesters simply because there were some corrupt ones among a otherwise good community!
Its funny that even most rational thinking people easily buy these generalisations and thinks every one is like that.
My parents are Hindus, and technically that makes me Hindu. Nowhere in Vedas (with my limited exposure, I must agree) it says not to eat beef, or to eat Pork for that matter.
Sorry, this was an unnecessary and serious turn to a otherwise Okay thread ? Ignore this and go ahead

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by OMAR KHAN:

So I guess we are saying the same thing with different words.

Not at all. I am saying that don't give too much importance to religion. It is man made anyway. You can make your own too. I believe in commmon sense. Yes, I may make mistakes. But so do orthodox religious people.

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:

Omar, I have pointed out so many wrong beliefs.

I only know Islam and Christianity.
You stated that Islam says that Muslims must kill infidels and I demonstrated that it is not true.
So now let's defend Christianity.
You said that Christianity says we need a intermediary between man and God.
Again this is not true.
Some Christian flavours think this.
But I read the Gospel and nowwhere Jesus said that.
So IMHO the Christian flavours that hold this belief are not fully implementing Christ's message.
So plz. point me other things you do not understand.
I cannot "defend" Hebraism or Hinduism as I do not know them very well.

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:

Yeah right. And how do you think Islam spread all accross the Asia?

Nobody is going to harm them now. UN/US will defend them. Why do they not change religion now?
Why Islam is spreading in US and Europe?
Anyway, I can ask the same question you asked for ANY religion.

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by OMAR KHAN:

Anyway, I can ask the same question you asked for ANY religion.

You don't need to. I already said that in my previous post.
So what is your point anyway??? What are you defending?

[omar khan]

Originally posted by Tracy Woo:

So what is your point anyway??? What are you defending?

I am not defending anything/anyone.
My point is this.
Religion and Science are two very different things.
They apply to two different domains.
Science applies to matter.
Religion to soul.
Science is based on emphirical experiments.
Religion is based on faith.
[ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: OMAR KHAN ]

[Tracy Woo]

Originally posted by OMAR KHAN:

You stated that Islam says that Muslims must kill infidels and I demonstrated that it is not true.

And you didn't answer my comment about Afghnistan. As I said before, all religions have spread by terrorizing local pupulation. So has Islam. And I am against that. Whether or not Islam actually asks to kill infidels is a mere "clintonian" technicality. I know that no religion says that per se. If you read my previous post, I have mentioned that all religions pay lip service to peace. However, this actually does not happen.

[Axel Janssen]

Originally posted by OMAR KHAN:

Why Islam is spreading in US and Europe?

Could it be, because people from islamic countries emigrate from economically not that booming countries?

You stated that Islam says that Muslims must kill infidels and I demonstrated that it is not true.

No. There are lots of examples of a tolerant islam in history. But nowadays there seems to be a strong flow of fundamentalism. Everybody interested might read this very interestingbook.
[ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: Axel Janssen ]