Kaljug

Exactly i agree, Sikh Marg is Unique and distinct path. Explaining this is like going to basics.

Fateh!

Unfortunately there are those out there who need to be reminded again and again that this is the case lest they succeed in their effort to absorb Sikhi into the folds of their own religion.

It seems that many of the recent threads here about Sikhi forbidding worship of idols, about Devatay/Devi not being Akal Purakh, and Bhagauti not being Durga Devi are like going back to basics. Nothing wrong with going back to basic though! They are the foundation for everything that comes after. ;-)

So what examples do you have for twisting Gurbani to fight external threats?

K.

Both extremes are wrong in this thread, tisra panth in ugardanti clears show that khalsa/gurmat is different/unique marg established by sri guru gobind singh ji.

This is my personal opinion based on my research of gurbani and bachitar natak in sri dasam granth and off course i m still learning so please correct me if i m wrong - Gurmat Sidhant/Sikhi Marg is different unique from all the different sidhants/marg and snatan dharma. However our dharam vaans( Guru Maharaj lineage) is coming from Luv/Kush- Suryavanshi lineage which is very much part of snanatan dharam vans.

source- sant gurbachan singh ji bhindranwale work on this, where he explained this by quoting couplets from bachitar natak.

Fateh!

No one is disagreeing with the fact that Sikhi shares much in common with Hinduism, but Islam shares much in common with Judaism as does Christianity, but no one seems to have a problem with these two children of the parent religion being considered separate paths. Why not the same respect for the uniqueness of Sikhi?

K.

So youre saying that the God of Sikhism was an entirely new God unknown to mankind before the coming of the Gurus?

No. Nirguna Brahman is aad sach, jugaad sach.

But men have been putting words in God's mouth since the beginning of time to serve their own base desires, and there have been spiritual beings who are not free from haumai who have been claiming to be Akal Purakh for the same amount of time.

K.

Fateh!

On a serious note, even if there is a tiny chance that Niddar Singh's vidya is authentic, Sikhs should make an effort to learn it.

As for Niddar Singh himself, well, he will not live forever, and the more rehatvaan Sikhs who master this art now , the more likely shastar vidiya will be propogated in the future by Sikhs without his peculiar views attached.

Maha Singh:

I thought it was Shiv Akhara. Why does Niddar Singh keep changing the name of his school?

Regards,

K.

see what i mean using Guru's perosnliaty as prop for their own hatred. and theyy talk about enemies of sikhism. the real enemy of sikhism is the conduct of stupid, egotistical and misguided arrogant sikhs.

bowing down humbly before Him and sincerely repeating naams and qualities of His with devotion is a fake act?

Do you even know what namaaz involves? Sikhs do not believe in the Mohammed as a prophet, why would Guru Nanak read verses in praise of an Arab sociopath?

K.

tell me this

if a hindu or muslims group says that sikhs are part of them, why should/does it have any effect influence on sikhs at all? because modern sikhs are fixated on external idenity (who 'we' are) and insecure. and are being influenced by external things, rather than inwards facing/concentrated.

if you really know who you are, why does it matter how other people define you? that is more their business.

something has gone wrong in the structure of modern panth. they are outward looking rather than inward looking.

The question is why should Sikhs be the only religion that is not allowed by the numerically larger religions to have an identity of their own? Why should every other religion have laws protecting them and special privileges and Sikhi alone should be stuck with being a second class member of somebody else's cult?

Sikhs were created to be different - we are teesra panth - and anyone who says otherwise is trying to use Sikhs for their own nefarious purposes.

You know, I have a hard time understanding why Sikhs are are so weak in their faith that they would even deny themselves and their Sikh brothers with their own unique identity. You accuse your brothers of being insecure because they are not OK with Muslims wanting to co-opt Sikh and then gradually convert Sikhs to worship their Arab prophet or Hindus desperately trying to replace their failed Kshatriyas with Sikhs to fight their battles, but you take great pride in the fact that guru Tegh Bahadur Ji died so that Hindus could maintain their own unique identity.

Do you not get that, unless Sikhs first have their own political, religious and linguistic identity that we will always be spiritually and politically dominated by those who want to destroy Sikhi or use Sikhs for their own purposes?

K.

major denial alert.

oh really? so why use the word Allah in the first place?

For the same reason that Ram, Narayan, Gopal, etc are used - they were common names ascribed to God at the time. If you actually believe that Allah of Gurbani and Allah who supposedly authored the Quran, please explain why Sikhs are not compelled to follow the rules set out in the Quran and please tell me if you think the monster who authorises the slaughter of innocents, the owning of slaves for sex, and the institution of tax for non-Muslims is the same Allah that Gurbani speaks so highly of.

K.

Why should i read quran when guru maharaj declared akaal ustat at the end all the dharams hold truth. I understand we are not gandhis, we don't follow politically correctness of this world but at least we need to acknowledge whats truth is truth. Topic tittle nor its contents didn't reflect whole islam.

This is harsh human truth applies to every very human nature, sharia panthi/fanatic will choose to see what they want to see, they will alway find somehow to misinterpret their scripture so its suit their own agenda, and mystics from the same scripture will see truth with their bibek and will find salvation.

Scriptures are two edge sword, if its used for agenda, it could turn human into demon, if its used for gyan, it could turn human to bhramgyani.

By looking at the sad state of affairs in sikhi these days, i m sure 10-20 years from now, someone will get up from the panth and bomb mosques and mandirs and justify it by misquoting lines from Ugardanti and misinterpret Ugardanti.

At at the end of day, it appears there are quite bit of muslim fanatics but one gotta look at their population which is close to 1.1 billion compare that with our sikh population and our share of fanatics, after study of ratio, everything gets put into place.

No dharam is given clean chit, this is kalyug. History shows fanatics have repeatedly raped dharam morals to suit their own agenda because it has given them credibility, following and power. There were kharkhos of 1984 if you look at their life, some of their family and in some cases all their family was killed by indian forces, they had nothing but tamoguni revenge(unjustified revenge) in their hearts as any regular joe blow would, but they didn't went out and just kill, first they took amrit and then join movements so it give themselves credibility, following and power so that they can start killing innocent people in name of dharam to hide their own revenge. At the end, silent sikh dharam was raped by these people, same thing happening with every other dharam even including buddhism which promotes ahinsa(non violence) dharam is been hijacked by siligans of sri lankas and commited atrocities against tamils in name of dharam.

Only thing remains untouched is truth/tat gyan of all dharams and the ones who apply truth in their daily life.

Fateh!

Neo:

Did you actually read the quotes I posted above and the surveys I shared on another thread?

The quotes are from the Quran and the Hadith. Ignoring them and saying that they do not represent Islam is like saying Sri Guru Granth Sahib & Bhai Gurdas Vaaran do not accurately reflect Sikhi.

The surveys I posted that in most cases above 50% of the population of Islamic countries support suicide bombing. That's 500 million people who want you and your family to die for not being Muslims, even if only a small fraction of them will actually have the stones to kill you. Are you seriously telling me that you believe that every other Gursikh you meet wants to murder innocents (or at least is OK with it)?

Why do you close your eyes to the reality of the situation and ignore what Islam actually teaches by using the excuse that Gurbani says that God exists in all religions? Gurbani teaches us that any premi of any religion can obtain phal of their respective religions, it doesn't say to ignore the obvious truth: the exhortations in Gurbani for all followers of religions to worship the Supreme does not mean that the exhortations to violence, genocide, rape and murder are not part and parcel of Islam's holy book.

It's also pretty darn silly to form opinions on other religious scriptures without reading what they say.

K.

"and he did not sacrifice sheep because he thought Allah might be getting peckish"

Did you know the word Allah is used in Gurbani to represent the one reality. The one reality that Baba Nanak addresses his ecstatic adorations towards. Also the great bani of Baba Farid who was a muslim and worshipped the one reality under the name Allah. How can you write such things when Allah was so close to the hearts of so many sufi sages the many fakirs who purified the mitti of punjab. The nonchalance with which you casually dismiss such holy names show what type of person you are.

Allah in Gurbani is no more the deity who supposedly authored the Quran than Ram in Gurbani is Ram of Ayodhya (unless used in that context).

K.

I am sure there is a Sakhi in Twareekh Guru Khalsa about Baba Nanak visiting a masjid. And also visiting the kaaba, i thought this was established fact.

Go and read the sakhi. Visiting a mosque is not the same as praying in it, and visiting Mecca because Bhai Mardana wanted to go there does not mean Guru Nanak Dev Ji followed any of the rituals of the Hajjis.

K.

Tony

It all depends on how the Quranic verses are interpretated as I have said before the difference between Islam and the modern orwellian state is that even though there is much in the Quran that is open to abuse and misinterpretation, it still glorifies the one God, the same God that Baba Nanak glorifies. Between these two peoples there can be healthy enimity as there was in the past when the Afghans invaded and the Sikhs fought them tooth and nail.

You call the genocide of Sikhs by the Muslim invaders and occupying forces healthy enmity? Congratulations for making the most pig-ignorant statement I've ever read on this forum. I think you should do as HSD suggested and shut the hell up.

As I said before this enimity can be healthy and useful, but the modern demonising tendencies have co-opted this healthy enmity and corrupted it. Your enemity to muslims has been co-opted by a virulent strain of nihilism which is the wellspring of modern democracy, the demonic void Guru Gobind Singh Ji talks of. By co-opting this modern secular trend you are opening yourself upto decomposing forces as ideologies have an existence and being like humans, the pattern of thought you follow and you gravitate towards actually posseses you and works through you.

Sweet. Now those who disagree with your bullshit do so because they are possessed by the demon of secularism. I guess that explains why I can rotate my head 360 degrees and can projectile vomit pea soup at will.

K.

This is not a physical injunction as Gurbani is not a Sharia Lawbook. It is psychological. Obviously those with a herd mentality will take it as a physical injunction. I can understand how the confused youth scrabbling blindly anywhere for a scrap of some sort of identity can torture such meanings out of Gurbani, ignoring the spirit of Gurbani that teaches tolerance and respect for all religion, remember Baba Nanak worshipped in a masjid and a mandir. He read the namaz and I would think he would not be so arrogant as not to show respect to Hindu Devtas.

I love your logic. Sikhs who follow rehat maryada are now following herd mentality, those who listen to the message of Gurbani and refuse to bow down to stone idols must be searching for themselves, not believing every single thing that any nutjob says he got from God directly means that Sikhs must be intolerant and disrespectful.

As to GURU Nanak reading the namaz: er, no. He also didn't run around the kaaba believing that God lived inside a black box, and he did not throw stones at a pillar because it was actually the devil, and he did not sacrifice sheep because he thought Allah might be getting peckish.

Worshipping stones, believing you are a Sikh, reading namaaz - it sounds like you are the one who lacks an identity, what what?

K.

Intial title of hypocrirsy of Islam was grossly judged not suitable/not fair. Therefore it was changed to Islamic "fanaticism".

Nope. Apostatasy in Islam is punishable by death. The Quran also commands Muslims to force non-Muslims to pay jizya tax and humiliate them each time they pay it, unless they convert to Islam.

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4457 says: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used not to kill the children, so thou shouldst not kill them unless you could know what Khadir had known about the child he killed, or you could distinguish between a child who would grow up to he a believer (and a child who would grow up to be a non-believer), so that you killed the (prospective) non-believer and left the (prospective) believer aside.

Khadir, or Khidr, figures in sura 18 of the Qur'an. He is traveling with Moses, and: "Then they proceeded: until, when they met a young man, he [Khadir] slew him. Moses said: "Hast thou slain an innocent person who had slain none? Truly a foul (unheard of) thing hast thou done!" Khadir replies: "As for the youth, his parents were people of Faith, and we feared that he would grieve them by obstinate rebellion and ingratitude (to Allah and man). So we desired that their Lord would give them in exchange (a son) better in purity (of conduct) and closer in affection...." (18:74, 18:80-81).

Umdat al-Salik 01.1-2 states: "retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right. However, not subject to retaliation is a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring."

Umdat al-Salik 08.1-2 says: "When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed. In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representative) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed."

Umdat al-Salik is a manual of Islamic law certified by Al-Azhar University.

Hadith (Sahih Bukhari, 9.84.57) says: Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him."

I seriously think that you should spend some time reading the Quran, the Hadith and the Sharia to which they give birth before you make such changes in the future.

K.

after our defeat in the first anglo-sikh war, the sikh army commanders offered the afghans multan and peshawar if they sided with us and helped fight the british. at the news of this, most of the muslims in the punjabi army went to multan and were besieged with the instigator of the second war. the khalsa went to the part of the punjab referred to as 'sikh country'. the afghans sent virtually no help, and left as soon as multan fell to the british. as half of the khalsa was trapped in gujerat (the town), the british moved in with overwhelming numbers and slaughtered them. it was said that muslim women came rushing out after the battle, cheering as the british cavalry chased and killed the stragglers who were fleeing the defeat, and then began to loot the dead bodies and mutilated many of them for earings, rings, other jewellery or just to make sure they were dead. i read this a while ago, when i was a teenager and went through a phase where i read as much as i could find about the first khalsa raj and the sikh army. it was such a heart wrenching thing to read about that i doubt i'll ever forget about it. those hijabbed b*tches probably looked like jamdhoots to the poor wounded sikh kids lying there who were drafted in to fight in the second war. thinking about this is making me so mad now. f*ck the pakis and f*ck the british. i hope they all suffer for what they did to us. b@stards.

There are rehat maryada that say to never trust a Muslim. Some of the idiots here dismiss the hundreds of years of suffering inflicted on Sikhs by Muslims - yes, Muslims, not Islamic Fanatics, Misunderstanders of Islam, but Muslims - that led to the formulation of this rehat and go so far as to accuse the author of espousing anti-Gurnmat views.

K.

Of course it is OK to do puja to stone idols as long as you realise that the stone idol is not the formless nirankar, paying respect to a representation in stone of cosmic principles actualised by nirankar is good.

Er, no.

Gurbani says: Do no to worship stone idols.

Gurbani does not say: Do not worship stone idols (unless "you realise that the stone idol is not the formless nirankar, paying respect to a representation in stone of cosmic principles actualised by nirankar is good").

K.

but there are even accusations of homosexual rape as well. did mohammed swing that way as well then?

Some of the Islamic scholars at least believe that here will be pretty little boys in Mohammed's Paradise for those that way inclined:

http://www.islam-watch.org/MAsghar/Islamic...cannot-miss.htm

K.

If I lived in a muslim country I would vent my anger against them the same as I am venting my anger against the rulers of the country I live in.

Sure you would, and then you would be killed by a gang of angry Muslims and the cops will do nothing to protect you.

Kaljug as your other posts show such as the one worshipping the most respected Mahadeva, that you are like much of the youth of today confused and seeking an identity, and when I question your view of reality you reply with aggresive posts that show how sensitive you are to having your personal reality infringed upon, well the lord of death Sri Neelkantha the Kapalika, is the one who destroys such tender conceptions of reality which when pressed elicit the shriekings in your post. I also am a student of the Sanskrit vidya and aim to purify myself every day to be able to receive her wisdom, i am not practising taqqiya but i am playing your devil.

Yawn! I have no problem with Hindus worshipping Mahadev, but Sikhi forbids Sikhs from worshipping Devi/Devatay.

If you think this is me being aggressive, you should come over and visit us at our gym. ;-)

As i said the modern orwellian state is something much more terrible than muslims. Someone has esoterically termed it the empire of the black sun, this image is highly disturbing, in jyotish the sun is the atma karaka or indicator of the soul he represents the soul of the universe and the individual jeev atma. This obscuration of this is the darkening of the internal light, which creates life, and signals the dissolution of humanity. This symbol was found in the dreams of highly fragmented scizophrenics with multiple personality disorders by the psychologist RD Laing. Its time to put away this hatred of other creeds and unite.

Black suns, orwellian states, dark light, demons, freemasons, skull-bearing gods. All you need now are lizard people and you could be the next David Icke.

K.

i don't see the problem with people claiming sikhi is part of the hindu dharam or part of Islam. Wasn't that part of the mission of Baba Nanak to spread the message to all faiths. Why does Sikhi have to be distinct why can;t it be part of everything. As long as they don;t distort Gurbani and treat it with full respect then they can interpret it how they like.

What a surprise! I guess we shouldn't take any actions when Muslims spread their propaganda and confuse young Sikhs about the differences between the faiths. I guess it's all find and dandy for Sikhs to start doing puja of stone idols and mutilating their bodies because Allah said so, and well Sikhs should respect all faiths by following their stupid laws.

k.

I am going to change title of your topic- hypocrisy of islamic fanatics.

What was the original title and why the change?

If you want, you could follow the lead of the British media and call it Hypocricy of Asian Fanatics, or follow the lead of the American media and rename the thread "Hypocricy of Religious (they mayb e Christians, they may be Jews - we're not gonna tell ya - but their names are Abdul Bakakalalala Jihad and Mohammed ibn Kaboom ibn Laden) Fanatics".

K.

Are you suggesting the attitude towards Muslims is nothing whatsoever to do with historical and personal experiences of Sikhs?

Fateh!

Don't you know that that's a racist thing to say? Muslims can't do evil, and they never have. And those who do, and claim to do so in the name of Islam with support from the Quran and Islamic teachings, are actually Misunderstanders of Islam and need your money and help (and preferably a British passport and ticket to the UK on the taxpayers money) so they can be educated. Besides, even if Muslims commit crimes, it is obviously because of Palestine and therefore they are not to blame for their actions.

Regards,

K.

Kaljug i am not a muslim.

I seek to promote dis-llusionment with the values and ideals of western society, which are based on enhancing personal greed and egotism and the progressive atomisation and fragmentation of human beings. Our government in the UK has told us blatant lies, is responsible for the massacre of millions of innocent civilians around the globe through arms sales and illegal wars. It does this on the basis of humanitarian moral values, something which has been called humanitarian imperialism. We in the privileged consumer caste in the west live off the blood of the 3rd world from resources have been siphoned off into the bottomless pit of western greed. By corporations who are legally obliged to make profit, to consider human life before profit would be an illegal act for a corporate entity. Also the increasing surveillance society we live where every move is tracked through cameras oyster cards and other devices.

Our responsiblity is to challenge this hierarchy like the original khalsa challenged injustice. But this involves some uncomfortability - ridicule from your peers, maybe loss of job and loss of respect from the establishment. But instead of challenging these injustices done by our governments Sikhs bumlick the government to be recognised as an official religion and to be valued members of the mainstream society. Sikhs have been assimilated into the mainstream, and have lost the power to change anything they have been well and truly 'got' by the mainstream in their effort to fit in. This hate of muslims is just something that goes with being part of the accepted society, a society thatb has been labelled psychotic and insane by psychologists such as erich fromm and RD Laing.

Blah blah blah.

I keep hearing you talking about how evil the West is and how Sikhs should support their Muslim brothers in bringing about the destruction of the West. Well, where is your condemnation of the appalling brutality, ignorance, racism and prejudice in EVERY SINGLE ISLAMIC COUNTRY today and throughout the entire history of Islam?

If you want to challenge what you perceive to be injustices, get of your ass and do some charity work instead of talking about how wonderful Muslims are for wanting to liberate us from the oppression of the West. Muslims do not wan't freedom, they want to replace the hegemony of the West with their own brand of Islamic barbarity and sadistic Quranic rule.

You talk of Sikhs bumlicking the Western world by being valuable members of society. Would you prefer us to join your Muslim brothers and live of state benefits while we plot the murder of innocents and the destruction of Western values?

You talk of "hatred of Muslims" being simply something that is essentially a belief promoted and accepted by the Western world as if Muslims are the victims. If you think that Muslims are somehow innocent of anything they are accused of, you are a blind liberal dhimmi who will be the lapdog of your Muslim masters if they ever come to rule, or you are just a lying Muslim spreading his taquiyyah and kitman.

Go live in an Islamic country if you have such a problem with the West and let's see how much you enjoy being a second class citizen and a slave of your Muslim countrymen.

Get this through your thick head: Muslims have been murdering, raping, killing, and conquering in the name of Allah since the 7th century and nothing has changed. The only thing that is different from the times of the Crusades is that Muslims know that they will never be able to conquer the West militarily so they rely on propaganda and leftist liberal loonytunes and taquiyyah and terrorism by Muslims living in Western countries. The usual Muslim tactic is to kill innocents, get punished for their crimes, and then whine and weep and wail on the news about how cruel the Zionist Crusader Alliance is when they get slapped down.

You practice all the typical techniques of the dhimmi and the taquiyyah expert.

I suggest that the next time you read the Western media and see all the holes and conspiracy theories, go and do the same with the Islamic media from Arab countries lest you become blinded to the lies coming from the other side.

I believe that a Sikh has a better chance of getting into a position of authority in the UK and other Western countries to make changes to improve the condition of Sikhs here and in the rest of the world. No Muslim country will allow the same freedoms unless they are using Sikhs for their own purposes.

I'd also suggest that ever Sikh here reads www.jihadwatch.org regularly to see the state of the Islamic world and the affect Muslims are having now in every part of the world you will find them. And don't buy into the usual liberal/Muslim nonsense of these websites that point out Muslim atrocities in the name of Islam as being racist because it is just the passive-aggressive way that they restrict freedom of expression and truth. The liberal media have already banned these sites from being accessed at work, but somehow they have not seen fit to ban the American pro-terrorist and criminal Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) website. Their message is this: it is racism to even talk about Islam's role in promoting terrorism, but it is freedom of speech when Muslims spread their hatred for non-Muslims and Jews in particular.

Regards,

K.

Fateh!

Is anyone else amused by the fact that the favourite expression of Kala Afghana and his chelay, in their works disrespecting the Bani of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, is found originally in Sarbloh Granth?

K.

I guess you mis-read my post. I NEVER claim or said that Devi/Devatay are supreme being. In-fact when I write:

Waheguru --> Kaal and Maya --> Brahma, Vishnu, Shiv.

It means that Waheguru created Maya and Kaal, then Maya along with Kaal created 3 devtas: Vishnu, Brahma, Shiva. and then these 3 deities created other 33 crore devte. Where I said that these devta are supreme being?

The ONLY being and Supreme Being is Waheguru Himself. HE is the only Sach/Truth.

Fateh!

Sorry, veera, I should have been a little more clear. I wasn't talking about you but there seems to be a definite theme in some traditional schools of Sikhi that seem to consider beings like Mahavisnu or Krishna forms of Akal or quivalent to Akal.

I hope you didn't take offence as none was intended. :-)

Regards,

K.

Waheguru --> Kaal and Maya --> Brahma, Vishnu, Shiv. In Vaisnavi traditions, the one GOD is Vishnu and is NOT the one from TriDev.

Fateh!

This is the only problem that I have with what you have written. Gurbani clearly states that the Devi/Devatay are not the Supreme Being, Dasam Bani even claims that these are all failed beings who made their devotees to worship themselves instead of Akal Purakh. Vishnu referring to himself, or his devotees referring to him, as the Supreme is still not in line with Gurbani. My point is that Gurbani refers to Waheguru as Hari, Gopal, Ram - but that does not make Hari (Vishnu), Gopal (Krishna/Vishnu) or Ram of Ayodhya Akal Purakh.

By the way, Shaivites also refer to Shiva as Supreme, Shaktas call Devi Supreme, etc etc, but they are still referring to their respective idols.

K.

"If a sikh is a rapist are all sikhs rapists, we should glorify the good in all religions and not focus on the negative"

Only if everyone had this basic common sense. Many parts of Sikhi today are no different from other 'Truth and God' monopolising 'Faiths'.

Fateh!

Well, if 50% or more of Sikhs were rapists or believed that it was acceptable to rape, I would concerned that there something in Sikhi that promoted this. Would you not have the same concern?

Here's a message I posted to another place when someone made the obvious point that not all Muslims are terrorists. You may find some of the numbers ... concerning. ;-)

Here's another poll you may find interesting:

http://people-press.org/report/165/what-th...-thinks-in-2002

Take a gander at the number coming in from Islamic countries:

Note some of the conclusions from Muslim countries:

* The majority of Lebanese support suicide bombing.

* The majority of Nigerians who expressed an opinion support suicide bombing.

* The majority of Bangladeshis who expressed an opinion support suicide bombing.

* 47 percent of Jordanians who expressed an opinion support suicide bombing.

* 43 percent of Pakistanis who expressed an opinion support suicide bombing.

You might wonder why I use a poll from 2002? Because that was before the Iraq War, the event that is supposedly responsible for radicalizing Muslims against the Western world (and the U.S. in particular) like no other.

Some other interesting findings I've seen:

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.ah...0.1/t.gif

This one finds that:

* The majority (52 percent) of Egyptians support the Sept 11th killings.

* Only 19 percent think Islamists were behind 9/11 (even the leader was an Egyptian), while 39 percent think it was an Israeli conspiracy.

Here's another one I found weird (not only because it came from The Guardian, either):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...ent.september11

Poll in Egypt, 2006:

* Which country do you most hate? Top answer - USA.

* In which country would you most like to live? Top answer - USA.

And another Pew survey from 2007:

http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=257

Which finds that:

* 42 percent of Nigerians support suicide bombing of civilians.

* 34 percent of Lebanese support suicide bombing of civilians.

* 23 percent of Jordanians support suicide bombing of civilians.

* 20 percent in Bangladesh support suicide bombing of civilians.

* 9 percent of Pakistanis support suicide bombing of civilians.

* 8 percent of Egyptians support suicide bombing of civilians.

* 57 percent of Palestinians support Bin Laden.

* 41 percent of Indonesians support Bin Laden.

* 38 percent of Pakistanis support Bin Laden.

* 20 percent of Jordanians support Bin Laden.

Contrary to what some may believe, people who point out these numbers do not hate all Muslims. In fact, I have many good Muslim friends who chose to reject Islamic teachings that condone and encourage the killing of innocents and converting everyone to Islam by force or deception.

Unfortunately, they are the minority, and most unfortunately they do not stand up and debate their more orthodox religious brethren because they know that what groups like the Taleban, Al Qaeda, Hizb ut-Tahrir, Hamas, Hezbollah and many others preach is real Islamic doctrine and their actions are based on the example of Mohammed who raped, killed, enslaved and assassinated in order to spread his creed. However, I do not ignore the obvious and concerning facts regarding present day Muslims either.

Regards,

K.