PERSECUTION AGAINST THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH PART 2
<><><><> persecution against the Christian Church Part 2
  BY : Social Entrepreneurs Network Team & fredex126:-


Islam is a religion of peace that for surething, but there are some people who understand Islam in a wrong way and they act according to this misunderstand and I agree with you saying "ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT" most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion
is, and was attacked without doing anything wrong and his home and his wife was taken away from him, what will be his reaction? will he think of peace? I don't think so, he must attack and defend himself and he wont blamed.

Why then is there so much persecution against the Christian Church? Why are hundreds of thousands dying to Islamic radical ? Islam regards all of humanity as one family as Allah SWT created mankind to get to know each other,
including the Chinese and their role in spreading Islam is no less than other races.
The only thing that separates one muslim from the other is their strength of faith (piety) in god/Islam, In short, there should be NO descrimination or hate among muslims just because they are of different race color or nationality, meaning, what It said is right!

what I meant is that Real Islam isn't what makes Muslims do anything defending themselves but it is the life itself and what's going on it and if some use Islam as their front cover to actions against humanity I myself consider them false Muslims Is Religion one of the worst evils this world has seen Like I have also said, we see the Orthodox church persecuting the Russian church in Russia. **
How much more will the western media stand by and watch such great persecution without saying anything?

** Why then is there so much persecution against the Christian Church? Why are hundreds of thousands dying to Islamic radicals?

* So unfortunately, the Christian church is responsible for much darkness in the world. I believe that many of its choices pave the way to Hell. So I am admitting that. Do terrorists that bomb children in the name of Allah go to Heaven where
angle will meet them or will they go to Hell? we shell and will stand against Christian persecution,
you will be a voice against it. If you will be a Seeing that you are so passionate about this subject .

SO YOUR ARE tired of hearing the news reports of people saying that Islam is a peaceful religion, when what I read and see contradicts like that.
Here are some of the few stories that happen every day,BUT NEVER SAID WHY, please do you hom work for that That what Israel does, do the work for you
It has its intelligence organization, Mossad, carry out false flag operations and deceives others into attacking their country Israel enemies. In short they get
others to fight their wars for them and more,watch out about Islam for Salam Is the true one :-

I DO NOT GO FOR THAT EVIL IN THE NAME OF ISLAM :
"Nothing in Islam can Justify the evil actions of the terrorism bombers barbaric terrorist attacks"were an "assault on the civilised world".
Our battle with terrorism will continue with all the strength resolve and will that we have they must be out of there Mind, incean,evil desgressed, shamless and outregaures. and do not tell me you do this in the name
of Islam and you say Allah Ahkaber / for Jahad , they are Evil they are going to HELL ,' HELL for sure they will hunt down for ever, for there barbaric terrorist attacks
which is assault on the Civilized world , Nothing in Islam can Justify the evil actions of the bombers.

where is the person who had the expertise to organize it all ???

What is the reason for there action my be to destroy..slay..the holy cross believe
by destroyer (the one who destroy) destructive to be destroyed by a built-in
device .

To Force a war on certain faith on to other,

Islamic extremists, a way of Compulsion of Beleif in Religion on other

JIHAD, yes Jihad to call for "holy war" "crusade"

Certainly any religion can be twisted to call for "holy war" "crusade" "jihad" etc. All I can say that Jihad is not a war to force a certain faith on to others, as many people perceive. It should never be interpreted as a way of compulsion of the belief on others, since there is an explicit verse in the Qur'an which states:"There is no compulsion in religion" Al-Qur'an: Al-Baqarah (2:256).

Jihad comes from an Arabic root word 'Jahada' which means to strive for a better way of life. Jihad should not be confused with Holy War. Jihad is not a defensive war only, but a war against any unjust regime. If such a regime exists, a war is to be waged against the leaders, but not against the people of that country.

People should be freed from the unjust regimes and influences so that they can freely choose to believe and follow what life they choose as long as there is no harm against another. Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer and terrorist in Islam. During wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions. This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed. At this particular moment it seems to be infecting the Muslim community more then others - I think this stems from a fundamental lack of secular education - Colonial Splits and JEWS TOO.

It reminds me of the American South with the KKK - buch of ignorant, uneducated racists basically - I think with the Islamic extremists you have much the same thing - racism certainly seems the order of the day.

<><> ( REPEATS THIS ) Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer and terrorist in Islam. During wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions. This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed., SO WHO, WHY, WHOM DOING TERRORISM IN THE NAME OF ISLAM IN NO MORAIL CLARITY

SPREAD DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM.
<><><>
U.S. Effort to “Spread Democracy” Leaves A Trail of Conflict and Suffering
><<><><> PUT FOR EGYPT AND THE MIDDLE EAST SECTION  <><><>
<>>>> P L E A S E """""""""""""
As a Palestinian family looks on, Israeli soldiers invade Nablus on April 11—the same day President George W. Bush hosted Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at his Texas ranch. Israeli occupations troops searched homes and arrested a dozen suspected militants in the West Bank city
 
 

ONE-TENTH of Arabs live directly under foreign occupation.

—Statement by Rima Khalaf, assistant secretary-general of the United Nations Development Program, New York Times, April 6, 2005.

Given George Bush’s practice of saying one thing while doing another (hailing the “advancing rights of mankind” at the United Nations while his Justice Department was jailing immigrants without due process), it is not surprising that his campaign to bring democracy to the Middle East so far has only meant replacing unfriendly regimes with more obliging ones. The people of Afghanistan and Iraq are still waiting for real freedom.

After spending seven hours in Afghanistan on March 17, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said, “There could be no better story than Afghanistan’s democratic development.” Laura Bush spent six hours in Kabul on March 30 and declared, “The power of freedom is on display across Afghanistan.” The two visitors might have been less impressed if they had stayed longer. Three years after the United States went to war against the Taliban, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said in a New York Times interview that private armies pose a serious danger to Afghanistan today, and corruption is rampant. Elections have had to be postponed three times because of fears that powerful regional commanders, armed by the United States to fight the Taliban, would dominate the process. Despite vows by international donors to help rebuild it, Afghanistan is still one of the five poorest countries in the world, with a literacy rate of 28 percent. It is once more the world’s leading source of opium.

In an article for the March 10 New York Review of Books entitled “The Real Afghanistan,” Pankaj Mishra reported that much of the aid intended for reconstruction has gone for Land Cruisers and high-rent housing in Kabul for foreigners. The U.S. military continues to hold thousands of Afghan prisoners in undisclosed locations across the country, and tribal elders complain about the presence of heavy-handed American soldiers in their villages. Women outside Kabul are still without rights. Afghan human rights activist Sima Samar said to Mishra, “Democracy and freedom are meaningless without justice.”

The Bush administration’s dedication to freedom is limited in any case. Washington threatened to hold up funding this year for the U.N.-sponsored Arab Human Development Report unless its references to Israel and the United States were toned down. The study by Arab scholars called for sweeping democratic reforms in the Middle East, including freedom of opinion and expression. Publication was delayed when U.S. officials objected to passages blaming Israel’s occupation of Palestine and America’s occupation of Iraq for impeding Arab development and causing “increased human suffering.”

A State Department spokesman called those statements “gratuitous,” but he could not deny their accuracy. In Iraq, the state of emergency remains in force and some 9,000 Iraqis, including children as young as 12, are in prison. Insurgent attacks continue, electricity and clean water are still scarce, and gasoline is often unobtainable, Even the mobile phone system no longer works. A young Iraqi woman complained to San Francisco Chronicle reporter Colin Freeman that before the overthrow of Saddam Hussain she could go to her job alone without worry. She used to meet her friends in clubs and parks, but she can no longer go out at night. The novelty of being free to criticize the government is wearing thin, she said.

Journalist Dahr Jamail, speaking at Stanford University in March on his return from Iraq, showed slide after slide of bomb-shattered buildings, streets littered with bodies, and hospital beds filled with sick and injured children. Hospitals lack antibiotics, pain medication, surgical equipment, even clean water. The Health Ministry was supposed to receive $1 billion but the money has never arrived. There is a six-month wait for prosthetic devices and they may soon be unobtainable.

It took more than two months of heated bargaining before Iraq’s major political parties were able to agree on a president, Kurdish leader Jalal Talabani, and two vice presidents, Adel Abdul Mahdi and Sheikh Ghazi al-Yawar. The three make up the presidency council, which appointed Ibrahim al-Jaafari, a Shi’i, to the powerful post of prime minister. But there was still no new government by mid-April as Shi’i and Kurdish politicians remained divided over control of the oil-rich city of Kirkuk, the role of religion in a new government, and the disposition of cabinet offices.

A powerful Sunni leader, Sheikh Harith al-Dari, insisted that he and his followers would not take part in the political process until the Americans announce a timetable for withdrawal. The continued alienation of the Sunni minority, and the deep divisions between Kurds and Shi’i, will make writing a new constitution a difficult and contentious process, and leave open the possibility that Iraq could split into an independent Kurdistan and a Shi’i theocracy, or end up ruled by a strongman who holds the country together by force. Democracy in Iraq is still a long way off.

Undaunted by the misery and disruption its policies have caused, the Bush administration is aiming to carry its campaign for regime change to Iran, Lebanon, and Syria. Bush and other top officials charge Iran and Syria with harboring terrorists and providing arms and funding to Iraqi insurgents. Vice President Dick Cheney has hinted that Israel might attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. Under presure from the Europeans, Bush agreed to allow the Iranians membership in the World Trade Organization if they would give up their uranium enrichment program. The Iranians insist the program is designed only to produce electricity, which the nuclear nonproliferation treaty allows, but Bush continues to threaten punishment if they refuse to comply with his demands.

A Different Message for Palestinians

A few weeks before Syria announced it would withdraw all of its military and intelligence forces from Lebanon by April 30, Bush urged that it do so, saying, “The Lebanese people have the right to determine their own future, free of domination by a foreign power.” Palestinians could use the same message of support. While Bush was ordering the Syrians out of Lebanon, the Israelis announced plans to build 3,500 new housing units in Ma’ale Adumim, a settlement housing 30,000 Israelis on West Bank land just east of Jerusalem. Construction of the additional units will result in splitting the West Bank in two and eliminate any possibility of a viable Palestinian state. It will also be illegal.

All Israeli settlements in the occupied territory violate international law and U.N. Security Council resolutions. The road map to peace that Bush initiated calls for a freeze in settlement construction. Israel has ignored all of these prohibitions, knowing it can count on Bush’s support. After all, the U.S. president contravened his own road map and 30 years of U.S. policy last April when he agreed in a letter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that a final peace settlement should reflect “new realities on the ground.” The letter called for Israel to remove all Gaza settlements and four small outposts in the West Bank, but allowed for “natural growth” of the huge settlement blocs. This meant Sharon was free to carve away as much of the West Bank as he chooses and leave Palestinians with the remnants.

The White House responded to the proposed expansion of Ma’ale Adumim with a slap on the wrist and a wink. Soon after Israel’s announcement, Bush said, “The road map calls for no expansion of the settlements.” He repeated this message almost word for word when Sharon visited the Bush ranch in Texas on April 11. But when Sharon stood firm on Israel’s right to achieve “contiguity between Ma’ale Adumim and Jerusalem,” Bush did not press the point. Instead he praised Sharon as “a strong, visionary leader” and promised Israel more economic aid.

The administration has re-emphasized its support for Sharon ever since the Israelis warned that right-wing Knesset members would increase their opposition to the dismantling of Gaza settlements if the expansion of Ma’ale Adumim did not go forward. On March 25, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer assured the Israelis that U.S. policy is to support “the retention by Israel of major Israeli population centers as an outcome of negotiations.” Rice followed him on Israeli radio a few days later with a similar message, saying, “the existing population centers will have to be taken into account in any final status negotiations.” (Note that Israel’s colonies in the West Bank are no longer settlements but “population centers.”)

The negotiations that Ereli, Kurtzer, and Rice referred to are a fiction. Sharon has made clear that his terms for a final settlement—a token Palestinian state surrounded by Israel—were not negotiable. He refused to negotiate with former Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, and he has avoided substantive discussions with Arafat’s successor, Mahmoud Abbas. In February Sharon declared, “There will be no diplomatic progress, I repeat, no diplomatic progress, until the Palestinians take vigorous action to wipe out terror groups and their infrastructure.”

Abbas cannot fulfill Sharon’s demand without risking civil war. At his urging Hamas and Islamic Jihad agreed to a truce on Feb. 8 that resulted in an almost total halt to Palestinians attacks and lasted for two months. The Israelis violated it on April 9, as they have almost every previous cease-fire, when soldiers shot to death three Palestinian teenagers as they were playing soccer in Rafah refugee camp. The army said the boys were involved in “smuggling across the border,” but witnesses said they were chasing a ball when they were shot. Such Israeli actions make it impossible for Abbas to persuade militants to lay down their arms.

Nevertheless his efforts have created an opening in which serious peace negotiations can take place. Hamas not only has agreed to take part in the July parliamentary elections but has told Abbas it will accept a two-state solution in a final settlement and recognize Israel within its 1967 borders. Since many Israelis support such a solution, Hamas’s change of policy means that a peace agreement acceptable to both sides is well within reach. But the opportunity will be lost if Sharon insists on the destruction of armed groups as a condition of resuming negotiations.

Abbas made a plea for Israel’s cooperation in his speech at an international meeting in London on March 1. “Experience has taught us,” he said, “that security measures which are not part of a serious political path do not achieve peace and security. We are going forward...to address our commitments. We only have one demand—which is reciprocity, according to the main elements of the road map.”

Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat appealed directly to Bush. Referring to the expansion of Ma’ale Adumim he said, “The land that is supposed to be for a future Palestinian state is being eaten up. With this settlement building, and the wall that is being built, the question for President Bush is: What is left to be negotiated?” He urged Bush to intervene directly with Israel to stop further construction. Erekat’s reference to the wall was especially relevant. In mid-March the Israeli cabinet approved a route that would put part of the city of Bethlehem on the Israeli side of the wall, along with the entire village of Shuafat. This latest land grab by Israel, which will affect more than 11,500 Palestinians, went seemingly unnoticed by the Bush administration, whose campaign for the rule of law in the Middle East stops at the Israeli border.

That campaign was compromised in any case by Bush’s appointment of John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations—an organization he has sharply criticized. Like his mentor, former Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC), Bolton is a fierce pro-Israel hawk. In 1989 he blocked admission of the PLO to the World Health Organization and UNESCO and pressed for repeal of the U.N. resolution equating Zionism with racism. As a member of the board of advisers of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), he is a close associate of Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and others who in 1996 served as advisers to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

Their strategy paper, titled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” urged that Israel downplay peace efforts with the Palestinians and focus instead on ousting Saddam Hussain. Another author of the paper, David Wurmser, was Bolton’s senior adviser in the State Department until 2003, when he became Vice President Dick Cheney’s Middle East adviser. Wurmser’s book, Tyranny’s Ally: America’s Failure to Defeat Saddam Hussein, published in 1999, is a polemic urging U.S. action to depose Saddam Hussain. According to Wurmser, Saddam’s regime was a product of “pan-Arabic nationalism,” which is a source of tyranny also exemplified by the rulers of Iran and Syria. The PLO, “a close and powerful ally of Saddam,” is part of this movement and like Iran and Syria “wishes to damage U.S. interests.” The author accuses the PLO of hiding Iraq’s nuclear plans and materials in its Baghdad offices to keep them out of reach of U.N. arms inspectors.

 Wurmser writes that “most Middle East regimes shun losers and embrace winners.” Therefore, carrying out a policy that “razes Saddam’s Ba’athism to the ground” will “cause our regional enemies to wilt.... and promote pro-American coalitions in the region, unravel hostile coalitions, and profoundly frighten those states and factions that have thrived on anti-Americanism.” Not incidentally, he points out that Iraq “occupies some of the most strategically blessed and resource-laden territory of the Middle East.”

The administration’s foreign policy statement, released in September 2003 and titled the “National Security Strategy of the United States,” clearly was patterned on such recommendations, especially in asserting America’s right to take pre-emptive action against any state perceived as hostile to U.S. interests. “Iraq would be the first test [of this policy] but not the last,” an administration official said.

The strategy recommended by Wurmser and his fellow hawks so far has not produced the benefits they predicted. Given the hostility aroused by the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Washington’s continued support for Israel, Arab leaders would risk overthrow if they formed “pro-American coalitions.” Al-Qaeda is recruiting new members. Violence and disunity continue to plague Iraq, and it is not certain the next Iraqi government will be a desirable ally. The rulers of Syria and Iran have not wilted and, faced with threats from the United States, are more likely to clamp down on internal dissent than move toward democracy. In the absence of Syrian troops, Lebanon could again erupt in sectarian violence.

Bush claims his policies are promoting democracy, but the administration’s record of human rights abuses at home and abroad suggest that freedom and the rule of law are not what he has in mind. The permanent bases the military is building in Iraq, and the influence on U.S. policy of pro-Israel fantasists such as Bolton and Wurmser, suggest that the Bush administration’s ultimate goal is U.S. domination over the oil-rich Gulf region, and an Israel free to maintain its occupation of other people’s land. A truly democratic Middle East would make it impossible to achieve these goals.
June 13, 2005 | 8:08 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  12 comments | post a comment
Comments
Hake3
June 13, 2005 | 9:37 PM
[delete]
"All the things you said ...... going through my head!".......nothing could be said more than that!

BRAVO!
King TUT JR.
June 13, 2005 | 10:43 PM
REAL FREEDOM [delete]
JUST ASKED GWB , WHAT IS THE NAME OF HIS GAME.:-
Given George Bush’s practice of saying one thing while doing another (hailing the “advancing rights of mankind” of Today .
King TUT JR.

REAL FREEDOM [delete]
JUST ASKED GWB , WHAT IS THE NAME OF HIS GAME.:-
Given George Bush’s practice of saying one thing while doing another (hailing the “advancing rights of mankind” of Today .
King TUT JR.

Welcom to My Pages :- Creating the Spirit of Togetherness :
This is Fredex126 (King TUT JR.)
He want to be your friend > Creating the Spirit of Togetherness >
"'Todd Twala"
Dear
HI:-
It about time for Every one to Pay A Visit to my Page ''Fredex 126,, TIG : Egypt Section,
and tell me if the LION Still Sleeps to See << Spread Democracy and Freedom >>
<< Get Smart--Global Project >>
To Keep them Busy in Search for Peace, not Confilict War and Anger.
<< Get Smart--Global Project in Peace Manner >>à
Please given me your feed back, how to do it and tell :
the rest of your friend about it .
thankx s h e k a r e n ,
Best regards
Fredex126 -- king tut jr.
King TUT JR.
June 19, 2005 | 12:33 PM
U.S.A. ULTIMATE GOAL [delete]
the Bush administration’s ultimate goal is U.S. domination over the oil-rich Gulf region, and an Israel free to maintain its occupation of other people’s land. A truly democratic Middle East would make it impossible to achieve these goals.
King TUT JR.
J
THE LATEST LAND GRAB [delete]
This latest land grab by Israel, which will affect more than 11,500 Palestinians, went seemingly unnoticed by the Bush administration, whose campaign for the rule of law in the Middle East stops at the Israeli border.

King TUT JR.

DEMOCRATIC REFORMS TONED DOWN OR UP >. [delete]
The Bush administration’s dedication to freedom is limited in any case. Washington threatened to hold up funding this year for the U.N.-sponsored Arab Human Development Report unless its references to Israel and the United States were toned down. The study by Arab scholars called for sweeping democratic reforms in the Middle East, including freedom of opinion and expression.
King TUT JR.

NO PALESTINIAN STATE LAND. [delete]
YOU SEE FOR YOUR SELF :
While Bush was ordering the Syrians out of Lebanon, the Israelis announced plans to build 3,500 new housing units in Ma’ale Adumim, a settlement housing 30,000 Israelis on West Bank land just east of Jerusalem. Construction of the additional units will result in splitting the West Bank in two and eliminate any possibility of a viable Palestinian state. It will also be illegal.

King TUT JR.

WHAT MORE HUNTED MISERY TO COME ;- [delete]
WHAT MORE TO GO AND TO DO :
Undaunted by the misery and disruption its policies have caused, the Bush administration is aiming to carry its campaign for regime change to Iran, Lebanon, and Syria. Bush and other top officials charge Iran and Syria with harboring terrorists and providing arms and funding to Iraqi insurgents.
King TUT JR.

WURMSER, IS SMART KIDEEE TO WILT [delete]
HE know what he say and is right to writes ::_ Wurmser writes, that “most Middle East regimes shun losers and embrace winners.” Therefore, carrying out a policy that “razes Saddam’s Ba’athism to the ground” will “cause our regional enemies to wilt.... and promote pro-American coalitions in the region, unravel hostile coalitions, and profoundly frighten those states and factions that have thrived on anti-Americanism.” Not incidentally, he points out that Iraq “occupies some of the most strategically blessed and resource-laden territory of the Middle East.”

King TUT JR.

WURMSER, IS SMART KIDEEE TO WILT [delete]
HE know what he say and is right to writes ::_ Wurmser writes, that “most Middle East regimes shun losers and embrace winners.” Therefore, carrying out a policy that “razes Saddam’s Ba’athism to the ground” will “cause our regional enemies to wilt.... and promote pro-American coalitions in the region, unravel hostile coalitions, and profoundly frighten those states and factions that have thrived on anti-Americanism.” Not incidentally, he points out that Iraq “occupies some of the most strategically blessed and resource-laden territory of the Middle East.”

King TUT JR.

PERSECUTION AGAINST THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH PART 2 [edit] [delete]

<><><><> persecution against the Christian Church Part 2
  BY : Social Entrepreneurs Network Team & fredex126:-

,.<><> ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT:-

Why then is there so much persecution against the Christian Church? Why are hundreds of thousands dying to Islamic radical ? Islam regards all of humanity as one family as Allah SWT created mankind to get to know each other,
including the Chinese and their role in spreading Islam is no less than other races.
The only thing that separates one muslim from the other is their strength of faith (piety) in god/Islam, In short, there should be NO descrimination or hate among muslims just because they are of different race color or nationality, meaning, what It said is right!

Islam is a religion of peace that for surething, but there are some people who understand Islam in a wrong way and they act according to this misunderstand and I agree with you saying "ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT" most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion
is, and was attacked without doing anything wrong and his home and his wife was taken away from him, what will be his reaction? will he think of peace? I don't think so, he must attack and defend himself and he wont blamed.

what I meant is that Real Islam isn't what makes Muslims do anything defending themselves but it is the life itself and what's going on it and if some use Islam as their front cover to actions against humanity I myself consider them false Muslims Is Religion one of the worst evils this world has seen.

Like I have also said, we see the Orthodox church persecuting the Russian church in Russia. **
How much more will the western media stand by and watch such great persecution without saying anything?

** Why then is there so much persecution against the Christian Church? Why are hundreds of thousands dying to Islamic radicals?

* So unfortunately, the Christian church is responsible for much darkness in the world. I believe that many of its choices pave the way to Hell. So I am admitting that. Do terrorists that bomb children in the name of Allah go to Heaven where
angle will meet them or will they go to Hell? we shell and will stand against Christian persecution,
you will be a voice against it. If you will be a Seeing that you are so passionate about this subject .

SO YOUR ARE tired of hearing the news reports of people saying that Islam is a peaceful religion, when what I read and see contradicts like that.
Here are some of the few stories that happen every day,BUT NEVER SAID WHY, please do you hom work for that That what Israel does, do the work for you
It has its intelligence organization, Mossad, carry out false flag operations and deceives others into attacking their country Israel enemies. In short they get
others to fight their wars for them and more,watch out about Islam for Salam Is the true one :-

I DO NOT GO FOR THAT EVIL IN THE NAME OF ISLAM :
"Nothing in Islam can Justify the evil actions of the terrorism bombers barbaric terrorist attacks"were an "assault on the civilised world".
Our battle with terrorism will continue with all the strength resolve and will that we have they must be out of there Mind, incean,evil desgressed, shamless and outregaures. and do not tell me you do this in the name
of Islam and you say Allah Ahkaber / for Jahad , they are Evil they are going to HELL ,' HELL for sure they will hunt down for ever, for there barbaric terrorist attacks
which is assault on the Civilized world , Nothing in Islam can Justify the evil actions of the bombers.

where is the person who had the expertise to organize it all ???

What is the reason for there action my be to destroy..slay..the holy cross believe
by destroyer (the one who destroy) destructive to be destroyed by a built-in
device .

To Force a war on certain faith on to other,

Islamic extremists, a way of Compulsion of Beleif in Religion on other

JIHAD, yes Jihad to call for "holy war" "crusade"

Certainly any religion can be twisted to call for "holy war" "crusade" "jihad" etc. All I can say that Jihad is not a war to force a certain faith on to others, as many people perceive. It should never be interpreted as a way of compulsion of the belief on others, since there is an explicit verse in the Qur'an which states:"There is no compulsion in religion" Al-Qur'an: Al-Baqarah (2:256).

Jihad comes from an Arabic root word 'Jahada' which means to strive for a better way of life. Jihad should not be confused with Holy War. Jihad is not a defensive war only, but a war against any unjust regime. If such a regime exists, a war is to be waged against the leaders, but not against the people of that country.

People should be freed from the unjust regimes and influences so that they can freely choose to believe and follow what life they choose as long as there is no harm against another. Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer and terrorist in Islam. During wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions. This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed. At this particular moment it seems to be infecting the Muslim community more then others - I think this stems from a fundamental lack of secular education - Colonial Splits and JEWS TOO.

It reminds me of the American South with the KKK - buch of ignorant, uneducated racists basically - I think with the Islamic extremists you have much the same thing - racism certainly seems the order of the day.

<><> ( REPEATS THIS ) Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer and terrorist in Islam. During wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions. This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed., SO WHO, WHY, WHOM DOING TERRORISM IN THE NAME OF ISLAM IN NO MORAIL CLARITY .
August 28, 2005 | 1:29 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  20 comments | post a comment
Comments
King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:31 PM
WHY DO YOU KNOW TELL ME [delete]
Why then is there so much persecution against the Christian Church? Why are hundreds of thousands dying to Islamic radical ? Islam regards all of humanity as one family as Allah SWT created mankind to get to know each other,
including the Chinese and their role in spreading Islam is no less than other races.
King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:34 PM
IS ISLAM IS RELIGION DO YOU AGREE WIT ME TELL ME [delete]
Islam is a religion of peace that for surething, but there are some people who understand Islam in a wrong way and they act according to this misunderstand and I agree with you saying "ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT" most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion
is, and was attacked without doing anything wrong and his home and his wife was taken away from him, what will be his reaction? will he think of peace? I don't think so, he must attack and defend himself and he wont blamed.

what I meant is that Real Islam isn't what makes Muslims do anything defending themselves but it is the life itself and what's going on it and if some use Islam as their front cover to actions against humanity I myself consider them false Muslims Is Religion one of the worst evils this world has seen.


King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:35 PM
WHY WHO IS PAYING THE PRICE ME AND YOU [delete]
"Nothing in Islam can Justify the evil actions of the terrorism bombers barbaric terrorist attacks"were an "assault on the civilised world".
Our battle with terrorism will continue with all the strength resolve and will that we have they must be out of there Mind, incean,evil desgressed, shamless and outregaures. and do not tell me you do this in the name
of Islam and you say Allah Ahkaber / for Jahad , they are Evil they are going to HELL ,' HELL for sure they will hunt down for ever, for there barbaric terrorist attacks
which is assault on the Civilized world , Nothing in Islam can Justify the evil actions of the bombers.

where is the person who had the expertise to organize it all ???

What is the reason for there action my be to destroy..slay..the holy cross believe
by destroyer (the one who destroy) destructive to be destroyed by a built-in
device .

To Force a war on certain faith on to other,


King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:37 PM
WHOES WORK THIS FIND OUT IS NOT REAL [delete]
JIHAD, yes Jihad to call for "holy war" "crusade"Certainly any religion can be twisted to call for "holy war" "crusade" "jihad" etc. All I can say that Jihad is not a war to force a certain faith on to others, as many people perceive. It should never be interpreted as a way of compulsion of the belief on others, since there is an explicit verse in the Qur'an which states:"There is no compulsion in religion" Al-Qur'an: Al-Baqarah (2:256).

King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:40 PM
COLONIAL SPLITS JEWS TOO WHY [delete]
People should be freed from the unjust regimes and influences so that they can freely choose to believe and follow what life they choose as long as there is no harm against another. Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer and terrorist in Islam. During wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions. This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed. At this particular moment it seems to be infecting the Muslim community more then others - I think this stems from a fundamental lack of secular education - Colonial Splits and JEWS TOO.


King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:42 PM
People should be freed from the unjust regimes and influence [delete]
People should be freed from the unjust regimes and influences so that they can freely choose to believe and follow what life they choose as long as there is no harm against another. Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer and terrorist in Islam. During wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions. This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed. At this particular moment it seems to be infecting the Muslim community more then others - I think this stems from a fundamental lack of secular education - Colonial Splits and JEWS TOO.

It reminds me of the American South with the KKK - buch of ignorant, uneducated racists basically - I think with the Islamic extremists you have much the same thing - racism certainly seems the order of the day.


King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:44 PM
WHOM DOING TERRORISM IN THE NAME OF WHOM DOING TERRORISM IN THE NAME OF ISLAM IN NO MORAIL CLARITY . [delete]
Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer and terrorist in Islam. During wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions. This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed., SO WHO, WHY, WHOM DOING TERRORISM IN THE NAME OF ISLAM IN NO MORAIL CLARITY .

King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:45 PM
TELL ME , [delete]
hen we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion
is, and was attacked without doing anything wrong and his home and his wife was taken away from him, what will be his reaction? will he think of peace? I don't think so, he must attack and defend himself and he wont blamed.


King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:46 PM
WE SHALL STAND DO YOU AGREEÉ... [delete]
we shell and will stand against Christian persecution,
you will be a voice against it. If you will be a Seeing that you are so passionate about this subject .

King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:49 PM
SPREADS THE WORDS YES YOU AND ME ALL [delete]
Why then is there so much persecution against the Christian Church? Why are hundreds of thousands dying to Islamic radicals?

IAM WRITING ALL THIS FOR YOU WORDS PLEASE SPEAKOUT,AND SPREAD THE WORDS
King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 1:56 PM
WHAT IS SAID IS RIGHT DO YOU AGREE [delete]
The only thing that separates one muslim from the other is their strength of faith (piety) in god/Islam, In short, there should be NO descrimination or hate among muslims just because they are of different race color or nationality, meaning, what It said is right!

Islam is a religion of peace that for surething, but there are some people who understand Islam in a wrong way and they act according to this misunderstand and I agree with you saying "ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT" most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other
King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 2:01 PM
"ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT" most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, t ISLAM IS PERFECT...FALSE MUS [delete]
""ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT" most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion " most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion " most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion "ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT" most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion " most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion "ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT" most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion
King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 2:03 PM
SO YOU TIRED ME TOO THANK XX [delete]
SO YOUR ARE tired of hearing the news reports of people saying that Islam is a peaceful religion, when what I read and see contradicts like that.
Here are some of the few stories that happen every day,BUT NEVER SAID WHY, please do you hom work for that That what Israel does, do the work for you
King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 2:09 PM
Post YOUR Comment [delete]

AND TELL ME WHY AND HOW

How much more will the western media stand by and watch such great persecution without saying anything?

NOT ONE WORDS

King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 2:11 PM
THE REAL TRUE ISLAM MEAN SALAAM PEACE FOR ALL [delete]
what I meant is that Real Islam isn't what makes Muslims do anything defending themselves but it is the life itself and what's going on it and if some use Islam as their front cover to actions against humanity I myself consider them false Muslims Is Religion one of the worst evils this world has seen.
King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 2:13 PM
JIHAD MEANING [delete]
This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed. At this particular moment it seems to be infecting the Muslim community more then others - I think this stems from a fundamental lack of secular education - Colonial Splits and JEWS TOO.


King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 2:17 PM
To Force a war on certain faith on to other, [delete]

To Force a war on certain faith on to other,

Islamic extremists, a way of Compulsion of Beleif in Religion on other

JIHAD, yes Jihad to call for "holy war" "crusade"

Certainly any religion can be twisted to call for "holy war" "crusade" "jihad" etc.
King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 2:18 PM
Certainly any religion can be twisted [delete]
Certainly any religion can be twisted to call for "holy war" "crusade" "jihad" etc. All I can say that Jihad is not a war to force a certain faith on to others, as many people perceive. It should never be interpreted as a way of compulsion of the belief on others, since there is an explicit verse in the Qur'an which states:"There is no compulsion in religion" Al-Qur'an: Al-Baqarah (2:256).

King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 2:21 PM
Islamic radicals is a False Muslims ? Part 3 [delete]


ARE YOU READY FOR PART 3 OR NOT ALL ABOUT .
Islamic radicals is a False Muslims ? Part 3
IS COMMING SOON
King TUT JR.
August 28, 2005 | 10:50 PM
Do terrorists that bomb children in the name of Allah [delete]


Do terrorists that bomb children in the name of Allah go to Heaven where
angle will meet them or will they go to Hell? we shell and will stand against Christian persecution,
you will be a voice against it. If you will be a Seeing that you are so passionate about this subject .

They lied to us

How did we get into this Mass
How the Hell we do Now to get out of its .
05.10.05 - AUSTIN, Texas -- Meanwhile, back in Iraq. I was going to leave out of this column everything about how we got into Iraq, or whether it was wise, and or whether the infamous "they" knowingly lied to us. (Although I did plan to point out I would be nobly refraining from poking at that pus-riddled question.)

Since I believe one of our greatest strengths as Americans is shrewd practicality, I thought it was time we moved past the now unhelpful, "How did we get into his mess?" to the more utilitarian, "What the hell do we do now?"
The Memo was a huge story in Britain, But Is almost Unreported Here. However, I cannot let this astounding Downing Street memo go unmentioned.

On May 1, the Sunday Times of London printed a secret memo that went to the defense secretary, foreign secretary, attorney general and other high officials. It is the minutes of their meeting on Iraq with Tony Blair. The memo was written by Matthew Rycroft, a Downing Street foreign policy aide. It has been confirmed as legitimate and is dated July 23, 2002. I suppose the correct cliche© is "smoking gun."

"C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. (There it is.) The NSC (National Security Council) had no patience with the U.N. route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

After some paragraphs on tactical considerations, Rycroft reports, "No decisions had been taken, but he (British defense secretary) thought the most likely timing in U.S. minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the U.S. congressional elections.

"The foreign secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the U.N. weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

"The attorney general said that the desire for regime change In Iraq was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases:(1) self-defense,(2) humanitarian intervention (3) UNSC authorization. The first and second could not be the base in this case."

There is much more in the memo, which can be found easily online. What's difficult now is placing the memo in the timeframe. Can you remember how little you knew about a war with Iraq in July 2002? Most of us who opposed the war concluded some time ago this was the way it went down. There was plenty of evidence, though nothing this direct and cold. Think of the difference it would have made if we had known all this three years ago. Now? The memo was a huge story in Britain, but is almost unreported here.

The memo does get us some forwarder. At least it finally settles this ridiculous debate about how Ours Dear Leader G. W. Bush just wanted to bring democracy all along and we did it all for George Washington.

Enough said. What to do? Now that we're there, at least we're on the right side, not even withstanding the disgusting Ahmed Chalabi as oil minister. Unfortunately, our very support for the good guys is making it much harder for them. A tactical Catch-22. I was impressed by the premise of Reza Aslan's new book, "No God but God," which is that all of Islam is undergoing a struggle between the modernists and the traditionalists, between reformers and reactionaries.

But in Iraq, which already had a secular state, we have the additional complication of sectarian/ethnic divisions -- your Sunnis, your Shiites, your Kurds -- not to mention, the tribalism within those divisions. (Am I bitter enough to point out once again that Paul Wolfowitz said under oath, "There is no history ethnic strife in Iraq"? You bet your, I am.)

There is a political solution. Like all politics, it requires a deal. What about letting the interim government make a deal with the Sunnis for us to withdraw -- as in, "You cooperate with us, and we'll get the Americans out of here for you." We can't make that deal, but the Iraqis can are they .<><>  .

<><><><> persecution against the Christian Church Part 2
  BY : Social Entrepreneurs Network Team & fredex126:-

,.<><> ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT:-

Why then is there so much persecution against the Christian Church? Why are hundreds of thousands dying to Islamic radical ? Islam regards all of humanity as one family as Allah SWT created mankind to get to know each other,
including the Chinese and their role in spreading Islam is no less than other races.
The only thing that separates one muslim from the other is their strength of faith (piety) in god/Islam, In short, there should be NO descrimination or hate among muslims just because they are of different race color or nationality, meaning, what It said is right!

Islam is a religion of peace that for surething, but there are some people who understand Islam in a wrong way and they act according to this misunderstand and I agree with you saying "ISLAM IS PERFECT... FALSE MUSLIMS ARE NOT" most of Muslims don't give enough respect to their religion and what are the results people from other places with also misunderstand Islam and wont know well about real Muslims, then we come to human beings themselves, think of a man living anywhere and whatever his religion
is, and was attacked without doing anything wrong and his home and his wife was taken away from him, what will be his reaction? will he think of peace? I don't think so, he must attack and defend himself and he wont blamed.

what I meant is that Real Islam isn't what makes Muslims do anything defending themselves but it is the life itself and what's going on it and if some use Islam as their front cover to actions against humanity I myself consider them false Muslims Is Religion one of the worst evils this world has seen.

Like I have also said, we see the Orthodox church persecuting the Russian church in Russia. **
How much more will the western media stand by and watch such great persecution without saying anything?

** Why then is there so much persecution against the Christian Church? Why are hundreds of thousands dying to Islamic radicals?

* So unfortunately, the Christian church is responsible for much darkness in the world. I believe that many of its choices pave the way to Hell. So I am admitting that. Do terrorists that bomb children in the name of Allah go to Heaven where
angle will meet them or will they go to Hell? we shell and will stand against Christian persecution,
you will be a voice against it. If you will be a Seeing that you are so passionate about this subject .

SO YOUR ARE tired of hearing the news reports of people saying that Islam is a peaceful religion, when what I read and see contradicts like that.
Here are some of the few stories that happen every day,BUT NEVER SAID WHY, please do you hom work for that That what Israel does, do the work for you
It has its intelligence organization, Mossad, carry out false flag operations and deceives others into attacking their country Israel enemies. In short they get
others to fight their wars for them and more,watch out about Islam for Salam Is the true one :-

I DO NOT GO FOR THAT EVIL IN THE NAME OF ISLAM :
"Nothing in Islam can Justify the evil actions of the terrorism bombers barbaric terrorist attacks"were an "assault on the civilised world".
Our battle with terrorism will continue with all the strength resolve and will that we have they must be out of there Mind, incean,evil desgressed, shamless and outregaures. and do not tell me you do this in the name
of Islam and you say Allah Ahkaber / for Jahad , they are Evil they are going to HELL ,' HELL for sure they will hunt down for ever, for there barbaric terrorist attacks
which is assault on the Civilized world , Nothing in Islam can Justify the evil actions of the bombers.

where is the person who had the expertise to organize it all ???

What is the reason for there action my be to destroy..slay..the holy cross believe
by destroyer (the one who destroy) destructive to be destroyed by a built-in
device .

To Force a war on certain faith on to other,

Islamic extremists, a way of Compulsion of Beleif in Religion on other

JIHAD, yes Jihad to call for "holy war" "crusade"

Certainly any religion can be twisted to call for "holy war" "crusade" "jihad" etc. All I can say that Jihad is not a war to force a certain faith on to others, as many people perceive. It should never be interpreted as a way of compulsion of the belief on others, since there is an explicit verse in the Qur'an which states:"There is no compulsion in religion" Al-Qur'an: Al-Baqarah (2:256).

Jihad comes from an Arabic root word 'Jahada' which means to strive for a better way of life. Jihad should not be confused with Holy War. Jihad is not a defensive war only, but a war against any unjust regime. If such a regime exists, a war is to be waged against the leaders, but not against the people of that country.

People should be freed from the unjust regimes and influences so that they can freely choose to believe and follow what life they choose as long as there is no harm against another. Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer and terrorist in Islam. During wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions. This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed. At this particular moment it seems to be infecting the Muslim community more then others - I think this stems from a fundamental lack of secular education - Colonial Splits and JEWS TOO.

It reminds me of the American South with the KKK - buch of ignorant, uneducated racists basically - I think with the Islamic extremists you have much the same thing - racism certainly seems the order of the day.

<><> ( REPEATS THIS ) Not only in peace but also in war Islam prohibits terrorism, kidnapping, and hijacking, when carried against civilians. Whoever commits such violations is considered a murderer and terrorist in Islam. During wars, Islam prohibits Muslim soldiers from harming civilians, women, children, elderly, and the religious men like priests and rabies. It also prohibits cutting down trees and destroying civilian constructions. This is the true meaning of Jihad according to Islam. People can/will take anything out of context to suit their own desires. But that does not mean that the meaning is changed., SO WHO, WHY, WHOM DOING TERRORISM IN THE NAME OF ISLAM IN NO MORAIL CLARITY .