FUCK OFF.........THAT SIMPLE.

 

Yes that was the study he chose to do. But if you read the article, it talks about Muslims and how they are violent.

One of the widest perceptions in the Western world, especially after the attacks of September 11, is that Islam's holy book, the Quran, promotes conflict, violence and bloodshed. Muslims argue that many of the verses of the Quran – such as the one asking the Prophet Muhammad and his followers to "slay them [unbelievers] wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out" – are taken out of context.
Muslim scholars say that the scriptures have been intentionally misused by Muslims and non-Muslims alike to advance political agendas. Critics say that the texts promote extremism, and that Islam has left a trail of blood across world history.
Recently, Philip Jenkins, one of the world's leading religion scholars, conducted a study comparing the texts of the Quran and the Bible, and found that "the Bible contains far more verses praising or urging bloodshed than does the Quran."
Riz speaks with Philip Jenkins and Shaker Elsayed, the imam of Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Centre in the US and former secretary general of the Muslim American Society.

So he chose to use the Bible and the Qur'an to make the argument. But any true religious scholar would have not only used the Qur'an but also should have used the Hadith. It is just that simple. But you evidently missed that argument and did not read the whole article. Because you would have seen the argument that he was trying to find a solution to.

 

All I'm willing to say about the whole 'terrorist' matter is that we certainly didn't mind giving these so called 'extremists' (People in Afghanistan) NATO hardware in the 80's to fight the Russians.

Muslim is not a terrorist cell, it is a religion. However, just like Christianity, it has cult extremes that take the religion and warp it completely out of context.

I think the US Military's real beef is with the cult that crashed a bunch of planes on US Soil.

 

Like you said, it is all about religious extremists. It is not about the entire religion, but the people who are not completely educated about the faith, believe people who think they know what they are talking about, and falsely quote books to twist the words into what they want done. And bam, you have religious extremists who do the will of the leaders of those groups.

And people just need to understand as you said that it is not the entire religious group.

 

I know that not all muslims are terrorists only a small amount are. I think that muslims, christians, jews, buddhists, and hindus all have some of the same beliefs but people like to put tags on others. If people would try to understand how religions are they would realize that all religions are closely linked together and have a lot of the same beliefs just have different names for God(s). Just hope that eventually we can all be peaceful together and work on more important issues the world faces.

 

Muslims aren't bad people necessarily, in fact I've come to find that the average Muslim is generally a lot more peaceful than the average American. It's just a tiny percentage of radicals that have created this terrorist stigma against them.

 

http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/


http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/

 

You know, I'm developing a real dislike for anything religion associated.

For me, Islam and Christianity has the same properties as the square root of -1.

Without religion, life is certainly easier.