Thai Muslims Protest At Danish Embassy

[TAWP]

Gulliver_in_LOS>> Your analogy is flawed, since we are talking about postings in ANOTHER country.

Would Thais boycot Europe if someone posted a picture that mocked some of their icons?

[Gulliver_in_LOS]

Gulliver_in_LOS>> Your analogy is flawed, since we are talking about postings in ANOTHER country.

Would Thais boycot Europe if someone posted a picture that mocked some of their icons?

Good question! Jyllands-Posten might even be interested in running a "test" on it.

[sonthaya]

Gulliver_in_LOS>> Your analogy is flawed, since we are talking about postings in ANOTHER country.

Would Thais boycot Europe if someone posted a picture that mocked some of their icons?

Good question! Jyllands-Posten might even be interested in running a "test" on it.

I don't think so, they have learned their lesson

[Boon Mee]

[Slim Chance]

Yesterday, on this website I posted 2 news photos of Iraqi child victims of US/British bombs and they were immediately removed by the enlightened action of the fine white men that prevail on this forum. They sure wouldn’t want anyone to see those.

Any of you high-minded lovers of free speech want to complain about that censorship? Of course not, you shore do like the freedom to taunt them nasty old Muslims, though.

The sad, frustrated, powerless Muslims use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

The sad, flag-waving, ignorant racists use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

Reminds me of when the pea-brain rednecks were up in arms about the riots in the US cities back in the 60’s and were screaming about sending ‘em all back to Africa. Seems the darkies were getting’ just too big for their britches.

Some things just never change.

Rednecks will be rednecks.

Free speech! Yeah, right. How noble. Um-hmm.

Edited February 12, 2006 by Slim Chance

[Steely Dan]

Yesterday, on this website I posted 2 news photos of Iraqi child victims of US/British bombs and they were immediately removed by the enlightened action of the fine white men that prevail on this forum. They sure wouldn’t want anyone to see those.

Any of you high-minded lovers of free speech want to complain about that censorship? Of course not, you shore do like the freedom to taunt them nasty old Muslims, though.

The sad, frustrated, powerless Muslims use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

The sad, flag-waving, ignorant racists use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

Reminds me of when the pea-brain rednecks were up in arms about the riots in the US cities back in the 60’s and were screaming about sending ‘em all back to Africa. Seems the darkies were getting’ just too big for their britches.

Some things just never change.

Rednecks will be rednecks.

Free speech! Yeah, right. How noble. Um-hmm.

Your comparison is skewed beyond belief. If I posted pictures of women and children blown limb from limb on buses in Israel then I'm sure the pictures would have been removed for the same reason.

Pictures of mutilation and death are slightly different from satirical cartoons, afterall nobody knows what Mohammud looked like so they were not caricatures, just a satirical dig at the psychopathic bigots who say Islam is peace, Allah is mercyful and then promptly proceed to blow up civilians in their names (PBUT Sic) - But then again the whimsical quip that Mohammud would maybe have liked some of the Miss World contestants led to 100 deaths in Nigeria.

Fanatics will be fanatics

[Jai Yen Yen]

Yesterday, on this website I posted 2 news photos of Iraqi child victims of US/British bombs and they were immediately removed by the enlightened action of the fine white men that prevail on this forum. They sure wouldn’t want anyone to see those. ....

Well, if I had 2,752 (approx.) pictures of dead people from the 9/11 attacks, would you want me to post those?

[Gulliver_in_LOS]

Now thinking about it, seems to me that some of the photos and comments in this thread, such as the ones "calling for the eradication of Islam" and so, are against the rules of this forum (see below). Therefore in the name of free speech we should either leave all the posted photos or delete them all.

3)Religious or racial slurs, rude and degrading comments towards women, or extremely negative views of Thailand will not be tolerated.

[opothai]

Now thinking about it, seems to me that some of the photos and comments in this thread, such as the ones "calling for the eradication of Islam" and so, are against the rules of this forum (see below). Therefore in the name of free speech we should either leave all the posted photos or delete them all.

3)Religious or racial slurs, rude and degrading comments towards women, or extremely negative views of Thailand will not be tolerated.

i don't see any racial or religious slurs on this thread, just comments and likley outcomes.

this is turning into a freedom of speech issue and for my tuppence worth i see the west curbing freedom of speech to accomodate the muslim fanatics but i do not see the muslim community moving one millimeter in return, is this to be one way traffic until it is to late.

Connect the dots - starting in 1972 at Munich - through hundreds of other violent actions taken in the name of Allah - and you reach the inescapable conclusion - Islam CANNOT co-exist with all the other belief systems on earth. Either Islam must be destroyed, or all the other belief systems must be erradicated. This is actual formal POLICY within the Islamic belief system.

well my friend that is a scary comment but in my mind, also a very true comment. by the very nature of the beast the muslim religion [not people] does not want to co-exist or tolerate the infidels [any other religion]

[remmy]

i dont agree with muslims trying to impose their religous rules upon non muslims. I totally support newspapers decision whether to publish or not.

The Quran might be saying that Muhammad's picture must not be drawn. It does not mean non Muslims have to follow their rules. I will draw any picture thats what freedom of expression is all about. Good to know that Europe still have brave editors who will not submit to the threat of violent islamic fundamentalist.

[sonthaya]

Yesterday, on this website I posted 2 news photos of Iraqi child victims of US/British bombs and they were immediately removed by the enlightened action of the fine white men that prevail on this forum. They sure wouldn’t want anyone to see those.

Any of you high-minded lovers of free speech want to complain about that censorship? Of course not, you shore do like the freedom to taunt them nasty old Muslims, though.

The sad, frustrated, powerless Muslims use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

The sad, flag-waving, ignorant racists use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

Reminds me of when the pea-brain rednecks were up in arms about the riots in the US cities back in the 60’s and were screaming about sending ‘em all back to Africa. Seems the darkies were getting’ just too big for their britches.

Some things just never change.

Rednecks will be rednecks.

Free speech! Yeah, right. How noble. Um-hmm.

Your comparison is skewed beyond belief. If I posted pictures of women and children blown limb from limb on buses in Israel then I'm sure the pictures would have been removed for the same reason.

Pictures of mutilation and death are slightly different from satirical cartoons, afterall nobody knows what Mohammud looked like so they were not caricatures, just a satirical dig at the psychopathic bigots who say Islam is peace, Allah is mercyful and then promptly proceed to blow up civilians in their names (PBUT Sic) - But then again the whimsical quip that Mohammud would maybe have liked some of the Miss World contestants led to 100 deaths in Nigeria.

Fanatics will be fanatics

Steely Dan, I'm happy you made a reply to Slim Chance, I was going to reply but you cover very well what I would like to say, but I was worried that my choice of words would upset George and get me banned, Slim sure have some weird ideas.

Edited February 12, 2006 by sonthaya

[Indo-Siam]

Here is an interesting piece from an Egyptian blogger - well worth reading:

http://bigpharaoh.blogspot.com/2006/02/10-...ight-i-had.html

Cheers!

Indo-Siam

[sleepyjohn]

It's so sad how religions seem to drift away from the basic principles and tend towards dogma.

I might add I have even seen this in a Buddhist organisation I have been involved with.

As soon as you start seeing outrage or anything related to it in a religion with which you have become involved....it's time to head for the hills!

[Gulliver_in_LOS]

well my friend that is a scary comment but in my mind, also a very true comment. by the very nature of the beast the muslim religion [not people] does not want to co-exist or tolerate the infidels [any other religion]

I would have expected some solid references for your views after making such a dangerous comment. From my little knowledge about Islam, I know that Muslims are asked to respect Christians and Jews, and the latter are referred to as "the people of the book" in the Quran. A historical evidence for this is the seven centuries long Islamic reign in Spain (711-1492), where every Muslim, Christian, and Jew, was treated fairly and all lived in harmony (also called the Golden Age). On the other hand, the crusaders killed every Muslim and Jew when they captured Jerusalem in 1099, even the ones who sought refuge in Solomon's temple.

Edited February 12, 2006 by Gulliver_in_LOS

[Hollywood]

"They" are so upset that the cartoon potrayed them as mad bombers that they got mad and burnt the embassies ???????????

[Sophon]

Yesterday, on this website I posted 2 news photos of Iraqi child victims of US/British bombs and they were immediately removed by the enlightened action of the fine white men that prevail on this forum. They sure wouldn’t want anyone to see those.

Any of you high-minded lovers of free speech want to complain about that censorship? Of course not, you shore do like the freedom to taunt them nasty old Muslims, though.

The sad, frustrated, powerless Muslims use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

The sad, flag-waving, ignorant racists use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

Reminds me of when the pea-brain rednecks were up in arms about the riots in the US cities back in the 60’s and were screaming about sending ‘em all back to Africa. Seems the darkies were getting’ just too big for their britches.

Some things just never change.

Rednecks will be rednecks.

Free speech! Yeah, right. How noble. Um-hmm.

Besides what other have already posted, there is a fundamental difference:

ThaiVisa is a privately owned and run list. The owners (and by extension the moderators) have every right to decide the boundries for what is acceptable on the list. We may disagree, but if a posting is deleted, it's not a question of censorship. You have every right to start your own list, where you can post whatever you want (within the boundries of the law)

On the other hand the satirical drawings of Mohammed was published by an independent newspaper. The newspaper decided to publish the drawings, and again we might agree or disagree. but if anyone tells an independent newspaper what it can or cannot publish, or try to punish them for what they have published (especially if done by the government of that country), it most definitely is censorship and can not be tolerated in a democracy, where the free press acts as watchdog against those in power. One of the problems in the current mess was, that the arab countries was asking, no demanding, an apology from the Danish government, as well as demanding that the Danish government punished the people responsible for publishing the drawings. To me that shows a total lack of understanding of (and interst in) how a democracy works.

Of course, freedom of speach is not without limits, and exercising it are not always without consequences. But it is for the police and the courts to decide, wether what was published was within the law. The Danish govenment can never be allowed to interfere with an independent newspaper. If they started doing that, the nation could be on the slippery slope towards dictatorship.

And if people are offended by what a newspaper prints, it's their right to boycot the newspaper of protest against it. But to extend such boycots/protests to cover a whole country and threaten to kill the people of that country (who had nothing to do with the drawings), again to me shows a total lack of understanding or interest in how the non-muslim world works. And the Saudi newspapers response to start a contest for holocost caricatures just confirms to me, that there is no wish to try and understand different points of view. "If someone offends our religion, we want revenge, and we don't care if the people we hurt are the ones responsible for the offense". It also confirms that it's ok for muslims to offend other religions, but it's never ok the other way round. It seems to be the same logic that daily costs arab lives in Iraq by the hands of people claiming to fight the occupation. And also the same logic that costs the lives of schoolteachers and the likes in southern Thailand.

I still believe that only a minority of muslims supports the way this have been handled by the radicals and their governments. But I'm getting to a point, where I am afraid that it is no longer a small minority, but more likely a significant one (at least in the arab world). And the silent majority at best unfortunately seems to live up to their "silent" designation, and at worst seems to be easily swayed by the propaganda. Can you imagine any other religion, where the religious leaders calls for a day to be the day of "anger and condemnation"?

Personally I have no religious believes, but have nothing but respect for any beliefssystem that advocates tolerance. Unfortunately, at the moment I can't see muslims falling into that category. Christianity wasn't any better a few hundred years ago, but have at least moved in the right direction.

Sophon

[thai3]

well my friend that is a scary comment but in my mind, also a very true comment. by the very nature of the beast the muslim religion [not people] does not want to co-exist or tolerate the infidels [any other religion]

I would have expected some solid references for your views after making such a dangerous comment. From my little knowledge about Islam, I know that Muslims are asked to respect Christiens and Jews, and the latter are referred to as "the people of the book" in the Quran. A historical evidence for this is the seven centries long Islamic reign in Spain (711-1492), where every Muslim, Christein, and Jew, was treated fairly and all lived in harmony (also called the Golden Age). On the other hand, the crusaders killed every Muslim and Jew when they captured Jerusalem in 1099, even the ones who seeked refuge in Solomon's temple.

You say Muslims are asked to respect christians and jews, perhaps you can give a source for that? Muhhamad at first preached tolerance but then as his bunch of cutthroats became stronger he began to tax infidels and even had jews slaughtered after a battle they were neutral in.

You could do with brushing up on the history of islam as well as it's scriptures, if you did you would see the christian attrocities in the crusades were a blip set against 400 years of muslim slaughter and forced conversions. You would also see that the koran codones the killing of all unbelievers wherever they are found. Islam is, and never was a religion of peace. Yes it's a pity muslims are not like they were in spain centuries ago, instead they are more faithfull to it's founder, a man who was not only a thief and murderer, but also a child abuser. what sort of guidence should we expect from a monster such as him?

Edited February 12, 2006 by thai3

[Steely Dan]

well my friend that is a scary comment but in my mind, also a very true comment. by the very nature of the beast the muslim religion [not people] does not want to co-exist or tolerate the infidels [any other religion]

I would have expected some solid references for your views after making such a dangerous comment. From my little knowledge about Islam, I know that Muslims are asked to respect Christians and Jews, and the latter are referred to as "the people of the book" in the Quran. A historical evidence for this is the seven centuries long Islamic reign in Spain (711-1492), where every Muslim, Christian, and Jew, was treated fairly and all lived in harmony (also called the Golden Age). On the other hand, the crusaders killed every Muslim and Jew when they captured Jerusalem in 1099, even the ones who sought refuge in Solomon's temple.

Gulliver, Credit where credit is due, the Muslims had an undeniable golden age of art, scientific advancement and tolerance towards other religions, that was then this is now. I enclose a link from the BBC website featuring surprise, surprise an extremist Islamic group who were prosecuted in Denmark for incitement to kill Jews - They quoted the Koran directly, citing a sentence which implores Muslims to kill Jews wherever they find them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/3182271.stm

To quote from the above link

--------------------------

We went to Denmark, where Hizb Ut Tahrir has come to the attention of the police and the courts because of its anti-Semitic views. In March and April 2002, Hizb Ut Tahrir handed out leaflets in a square in Copenhagen, and at a mosque. The leaflet, which also appeared on the Danish groups internet site, makes threats against Jews, using a quote from the Koran urging Muslims to 'kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have been turned you out.' The leaflet also said, 'The Jews are a people of slander...a treacherous people... they fabricate lies and twist words from their right context.' And the leaflet describes suicide bombings in Israel as "legitimate" acts of "Martyrdom".

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Makes you see the Danish Imans recent trips to the middle east in a slightly different light I think.

[dog412]

seperation of church and state. all are entitled to their opinions,to the extent they don't physically, or,intensionally,create physical violence. mental violence, or that which offends a persons sensibilities,are, and must be, a necessary tool in a evoluntionary "democracy". is islam equipped to deal with this? unfortunately, at this time i would say no.

[thai3]

Direct quotes from the Quran:

ANNOUNCE PAINFUL PUNISHMENT TO THOSE WHO DISBELIEVE (9:3)

Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve (8:55)

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah...And the Jews say Ezra is the son of God; and the Christians say Christ is the son of God; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; Allah's curse be on them; how they are turned away!" (Koran 9:29-30)

And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah (8:39)

When the sacred months have passed away, THEN SLAY THE IDOLATERS WHEREVER YOU FIND THEM, AND TAKE THEM CAPTIVES AND BESIEGE THEM AND LIE IN WAIT FOR THEM IN EVERY AMBUSH, then if they repent and keep up prayer [become believers] and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them (9:5)

[Gulliver_in_LOS]

These are verses from the Quran about befriending non-Muslims in general:

----------

[60:8] GOD does not enjoin you from befriending those who do not fight you because of religion, and do not evict you from your homes. You may befriend them and be equitable towards them. GOD loves the equitable.

[60:9] GOD enjoins you only from befriending those who fight you because of religion, evict you from your homes, and band together with others to banish you. You shall not befriend them. Those who befriend them are the transgressors.

-------------

These refer to the Jews and Christians:

-------------

[7:159] Among the followers of Moses there are those who guide in accordance with the truth, and the truth renders them righteous.

[5:46] Subsequent to them, we sent Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming the previous scripture, the Torah. We gave him the Gospel, containing guidance and light, and confirming the previous scriptures, the Torah, and augmenting its guidance and light, and to enlighten the righteous.

[5:47] The people of the Gospel shall rule in accordance with GOD's revelations therein. Those who do not rule in accordance with GOD's revelations are the wicked.

[2:62 & 5:69] Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians, and the converts; anyone who (1) believes in GOD, and (2) believes in the Last Day, and (3) leads a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.

[3:113-114]. They are not all the same; among the followers of the scripture, there are those who are righteous. They recite GOD's revelations through the night, and they fall prostrate.

They believe in GOD and the Last Day, they advocate righteousness and forbid evil, and they hasten to do righteous works. These are the righteous.

[3:199] Surely, some followers of the previous scriptures do believe in GOD, and in what was revealed to you, and in what was revealed to them. They reverence GOD, and they never trade away GOD's revelations for a cheap price. These will receive their recompense from their Lord. GOD is the most efficient in reckoning.

--------------

[TBWG]

Shooting oneself in the foot!!

I have just heard on the news that following demonstrations in Pakistan, the Gov't is to ban the import of medicines and Pharmaceuticals from Denmark and other countries (not sure which) following the cartoons saga.

Who's hurting who! Tough if your a Pakistani who's wellbeing depends on Danish medicine.

Another example of injustice in the name of religion.

TBWG

[sonthaya]

Shooting oneself in the foot!!

I have just heard on the news that following demonstrations in Pakistan, the Gov't is to ban the import of medicines and Pharmaceuticals from Denmark and other countries (not sure which) following the cartoons saga.

Who's hurting who! Tough if your a Pakistani who's wellbeing depends on Danish medicine.

Another example of injustice in the name of religion.

TBWG

Quite right, they are not too smart, and they have a very short memory, who was sending help and money during the resent natural catastrophe, I hope Denmark and the other countries who helped will remember this in the future.

[dantilley]

Just on my way to the local shop to buy some provisions and saw a bottle of milk with "THAI-DANISH" wirtten on the side in big letters. Stocked up on a few bottles and, at the rate I drink tea, I'll probably need some more tomorrow!

[Johpa]

Sonthaya I agree that the reaction in the Muslim world was highly disproportionate, when tens of people have died, and economical and diplomatic repercussions were imposed. In normal circumstances, the newpaper’s apology should have been enough. Unfortunately it was a golden opportunity given into the hands of extremists. But still think that the newspaper should have taken a more considerate approach before publication. By analogy, the media in Thailand are not allowed to publish derogatory materials about the Buddha or the King for example. Is this considered as against free-speech? I don’t believe so.

I for one am glad that Denmark has a far more open press than Thailand. And yes, the Thai lese majeste laws are most definitely laws against the freedom of speech and have been used almost exclusively by politicians to muzzle their oponents on issues unrelated to the monarchy.

Again, some here seem to imply that these "extremists" are a small minority. It is the small educated elites of moderate Muslims living abroad or in the better suburbs of the major metropoles in the Islamic countries who are the minority. Unless they can come up with a voice that finds resonance in the greater Islamic world, the Jihad will continue. Alas, Boy Bush and the neo-cons are the worst possible people to be in power at this particular juncture in history.

Meanwhile, I agree with a much earlier poster, support free speech and make it a Danish beer this month.

[Gulliver_in_LOS]

...

Again, some here seem to imply that these "extremists" are a small minority. It is the small educated elites of moderate Muslims living abroad or in the better suburbs of the major metropoles in the Islamic countries who are the minority. Unless they can come up with a voice that finds resonance in the greater Islamic world, the Jihad will continue. Alas, Boy Bush and the neo-cons are the worst possible people to be in power at this particular juncture in history.

...

I completely agree with your analysis. However we have to remember that most (if not all) the governments in the Muslim World are totalitarian and even oppressive against their own people. This is one of main reasons why the so called "educated elites" prefer to live abroad. But as long as the West continues to appease these dummy governments for energy or security interests, the hands of that elite are tied up. The latest example is Donald Rumsfeld's visit to North Africa this week, where he didn't mention a single word about human rights abuses in these countries, knowing that journalists and writers are tortured and jailed routinely in that part of the world.

[Phil Conners]

Yesterday, on this website I posted 2 news photos of Iraqi child victims of US/British bombs and they were immediately removed by the enlightened action of the fine white men that prevail on this forum. They sure wouldn’t want anyone to see those.

Any of you high-minded lovers of free speech want to complain about that censorship? Of course not, you shore do like the freedom to taunt them nasty old Muslims, though.

The sad, frustrated, powerless Muslims use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

The sad, flag-waving, ignorant racists use the opportunity to rally for the cause and vent their rage against the perceived enemy.

Reminds me of when the pea-brain rednecks were up in arms about the riots in the US cities back in the 60’s and were screaming about sending ‘em all back to Africa. Seems the darkies were getting’ just too big for their britches.

Some things just never change.

Rednecks will be rednecks.

Free speech! Yeah, right. How noble. Um-hmm.

Besides what other have already posted, there is a fundamental difference:

ThaiVisa is a privately owned and run list. The owners (and by extension the moderators) have every right to decide the boundries for what is acceptable on the list. We may disagree, but if a posting is deleted, it's not a question of censorship. You have every right to start your own list, where you can post whatever you want (within the boundries of the law)

On the other hand the satirical drawings of Mohammed was published by an independent newspaper. The newspaper decided to publish the drawings, and again we might agree or disagree. but if anyone tells an independent newspaper what it can or cannot publish, or try to punish them for what they have published (especially if done by the government of that country), it most definitely is censorship and can not be tolerated in a democracy, where the free press acts as watchdog against those in power. One of the problems in the current mess was, that the arab countries was asking, no demanding, an apology from the Danish government, as well as demanding that the Danish government punished the people responsible for publishing the drawings. To me that shows a total lack of understanding of (and interst in) how a democracy works.

Of course, freedom of speach is not without limits, and exercising it are not always without consequences. But it is for the police and the courts to decide, wether what was published was within the law. The Danish govenment can never be allowed to interfere with an independent newspaper. If they started doing that, the nation could be on the slippery slope towards dictatorship.

And if people are offended by what a newspaper prints, it's their right to boycot the newspaper of protest against it. But to extend such boycots/protests to cover a whole country and threaten to kill the people of that country (who had nothing to do with the drawings), again to me shows a total lack of understanding or interest in how the non-muslim world works. And the Saudi newspapers response to start a contest for holocost caricatures just confirms to me, that there is no wish to try and understand different points of view. "If someone offends our religion, we want revenge, and we don't care if the people we hurt are the ones responsible for the offense". It also confirms that it's ok for muslims to offend other religions, but it's never ok the other way round. It seems to be the same logic that daily costs arab lives in Iraq by the hands of people claiming to fight the occupation. And also the same logic that costs the lives of schoolteachers and the likes in southern Thailand.

I still believe that only a minority of muslims supports the way this have been handled by the radicals and their governments. But I'm getting to a point, where I am afraid that it is no longer a small minority, but more likely a significant one (at least in the arab world). And the silent majority at best unfortunately seems to live up to their "silent" designation, and at worst seems to be easily swayed by the propaganda. Can you imagine any other religion, where the religious leaders calls for a day to be the day of "anger and condemnation"?

Personally I have no religious believes, but have nothing but respect for any beliefssystem that advocates tolerance. Unfortunately, at the moment I can't see muslims falling into that category. Christianity wasn't any better a few hundred years ago, but have at least moved in the right direction.

Sophon

Well said!

[zzap]

Alas, Boy Bush and the neo-cons are the worst possible people to be in power at this particular juncture in history.

With the brainless dwarf at the steering wheel, and liar Blair reelected, I am afraid we will see further escalation...

Also, this is one of the topics where it is easy and dangerous to generalise, "the Muslims", "Islam" this or that, forgetting that it's not a homogenous community, but spread across very different cultures and parts of the world.

Having said that, there is no excuse for terrorism, and tolerance ends where people take to violence to impose their views.

The Thai Muslims I have met are not strict, many like to have a drink (when the wife is not around) and seem familiar with the concept of tolerating others. That was my experience in Bangkok, anyway.

[opothai]

well my friend that is a scary comment but in my mind, also a very true comment. by the very nature of the beast the muslim religion [not people] does not want to co-exist or tolerate the infidels [any other religion]

I would have expected some solid references for your views after making such a dangerous comment. From my little knowledge about Islam, I know that Muslims are asked to respect Christians and Jews, and the latter are referred to as "the people of the book" in the Quran. A historical evidence for this is the seven centuries long Islamic reign in Spain (711-1492), where every Muslim, Christian, and Jew, was treated fairly and all lived in harmony (also called the Golden Age). On the other hand, the crusaders killed every Muslim and Jew when they captured Jerusalem in 1099, even the ones who sought refuge in Solomon's temple.

while i respect what you are saying, we now live in 2006.

the interpretation of the koran,like the bible can be twisted and read to mean almost anything and at this moment in time the interpretation is 'islam is the only religion'

i should hazard a guess that if the muslims were to reign again thier would be peace,as long as we adhered to thier beliefs,

now do you really want that ???

[Gulliver_in_LOS]

well my friend that is a scary comment but in my mind, also a very true comment. by the very nature of the beast the muslim religion [not people] does not want to co-exist or tolerate the infidels [any other religion]

I would have expected some solid references for your views after making such a dangerous comment. From my little knowledge about Islam, I know that Muslims are asked to respect Christians and Jews, and the latter are referred to as "the people of the book" in the Quran. A historical evidence for this is the seven centuries long Islamic reign in Spain (711-1492), where every Muslim, Christian, and Jew, was treated fairly and all lived in harmony (also called the Golden Age). On the other hand, the crusaders killed every Muslim and Jew when they captured Jerusalem in 1099, even the ones who sought refuge in Solomon's temple.

while i respect what you are saying, we now live in 2006.

the interpretation of the koran,like the bible can be twisted and read to mean almost anything and at this moment in time the interpretation is 'islam is the only religion'

i should hazard a guess that if the muslims were to reign again thier would be peace,as long as we adhered to thier beliefs,

now do you really want that ???

I agree that religious texts can be interpreted differently. However this makes it more difficult to know or support the origin of your statement that Islam is intolerant towards other religions. Above I gave a real-world historical example about the seven centuries (that's a very long time!) tolerance of Islam in Spain, and NO, Christians and Jews were not forced to adhere to Islam then.

Back to 2006, agree that there are extremists who in the name of Islam are committing acts which have nothing to do with it. I believe their ideas are the ones which should be fought against and corrected. I said "ideas" because I don't believe that military operations alone, such as killing teenage combatants or destroying whole villages because of suspecting militants in there, are long term solutions.