Antony Alexander wrote: > I believe, religious renewal - the toxic elements > of culture will be voluntarily abandoned without > having to kill large numbers of people. _________________________________________________ source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-rotello/46-are-negative-about- is_b_17061.html Muslim societies would sometimes liberalize, loosen their puritanical strictures, become tolerant, and then face violent "revolutions from below" in which angry reformers would arise to drag society back to the fierce Islam of the earliest years. In that sense, Khomeini's Shiite revolution, and today's resurgence of militant Sunni orthodoxy, are just modern incarnations of something that has happened time and again. _________________________________________________ According to Osama bin Laden the attacks will stop when we convert to Islam, ditch our constitution, abolish banks, alcohol, gambling, and pictures of women, jail homosexuals, and sign the Kyoto climate change treaty. Details: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml? xml=/news/2005/11/17/wladen17.xml _________________________________________________ source: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060207_reality_islam/ ...Anyone who imagines that terrestrial concerns account for Muslim terrorism must answer questions of the following sort: Where are the Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers? The Tibetans have suffered an occupation far more brutal, and far more cynical, than any that Britain, the United States, or Israel have ever imposed upon the Muslim world. Where are the throngs of Tibetans ready to perpetrate suicidal atrocities against Chinese noncombatants? They do not exist. What is the difference that makes the difference? The difference lies in the specific tenets of Islam. This is not to say that Buddhism could not help inspire suicidal violence. It can, and it has (Japan, World War II). But this concedes absolutely nothing to the apologists for Islam. As a Buddhist, one has to work extremely hard to justify such barbarism. One need not work nearly so hard as a Muslim. If you doubt whether the comparison is valid, ask yourself where the Palestinian Christian suicide bombers are. Palestinian Christians also suffer the indignity of the Israeli occupation. This is practically a science experiment: take the same people, speaking the same language, put them in the same horrendous circumstance, but give them slightly different religious beliefs--and then watch what happens. What happens is, they behave differently... The only future devout Muslims can envisage — as Muslims — is one in which all infidels have been converted to Islam, politically subjugated, or killed. The tenets of Islam simply do not admit of anything but a temporary sharing of power with the “enemies of God.” Devout Muslims can have no doubt about the reality of Paradise or about the efficacy of martyrdom as a means of getting there. Nor can they question the wisdom and reasonableness of killing people for what amount to theological grievances. In Islam, it is the moderate who is left to split hairs, because the basic thrust of the doctrine is undeniable: convert, subjugate, or kill unbelievers; kill apostates; and conquer the world.