Reform In Islam

Reform In Islam magnify


I have GOT to stop getting distracted LOL. I start with one thing and get switched to something else. I have been really busy the last couple of days, so I haven’t been keeping up with my blog. Please accept my apologies. I am doing research right now for some upcoming topics, I don’t want to miss anything so it takes a little time. In the mean time, I will cheat with some easy posts.

I want to print some stuff that I have found out there from Muslims in regards to current events. I still see that people question Muslim attitudes, acts/non-acts, etc. I was a little disappointed that when I posted the letter which was sent 5 years ago on the anniversary of 9/11, I still saw people questioning all Muslims because of the actions of a few. Too bad it can’t be the other way around.

I could, if this blog was about Islam in general, which it isn’t,…but I could post a story everyday for at least the next 2 years with stories of Muslims against terrorism, against radical Islam.  Muslims who believe that those people in radical Islam are not Muslims.  They feel that the radicals are not following the Quran.  I could post those stories every day, and I doubt it would change some peoples minds.  I tried to point out just a few things in hopes of changing minds, please be aware that there is much, much, more out there and it’s easy to find. 

The following comes from a Muslim college lecturer. His concern over the U.S. invading and taking over due to human rights violations… I seriously doubt. At any rate, he is speaking against Sharia and of reform, both in the past and in the future. I may not agree with everything he says, in regards to the U.S., but I am always grateful when I hear of Muslims wanting to step into the 21st century.  It was written Sept. 9, 2004

Christianity had its own violent past. There were many things done in the name of Christianity that we no longer do today. In time, I hope, the same will be able to be said of Islam. As my friend salahudin said, Islam hasn’t been around as long as Judaism or Christianity. They seem to be having their own “dark ages”. If we are honest with ourselves we can start a list of the violence done in the name of Christianity. But even in those days, not all Christians acted the same way, as a matter of fact, MOST didn’t. So why would you think that all of Islam is the same??

Tunisian University Lecturer: Sharia Must Not Be Implemented Today

In an article titled “Shari’a Must Not Be Implemented Today” posted on the liberal Arab website, Dr. Iqbal Al-Gharbi, lecturer in psychology at Al-Zaytouna University, Tunisia, wrote that during Islam’s formative years, the Prophet Muhammad and the four Righteous Caliphs placed the best interests of the Muslim nation before a literal adherence to the Koran and blind imitation of the Prophet’s way of life (the Sunna). She stated that the principle of placing the Muslim nation’s best interests first and using logic must guide the Muslim world today as well. The following are excerpts from the article: [1]

‘The Implementation of Shari’a in Our Generation Harms Shari’a and the Islamic Nation’

Shari’a [Islamic religious law] must not be implemented in the Arab world today because its implementation threatens the cultural balance that has existed in this region for hundreds of years. For example, [implementing Shari’a caused] Christian Arab emigration to the West, which is a mark of shame on the forehead of the [Muslim] nation.

“Statistics show that the number of Christian Arabs, which today stands at 12 million, has waned, and their presence in the Arab region has diminished. In Syria today there are half the Christians that there were in the 1950s, and in Jerusalem, there are only a few thousand, when in 1948 they numbered 50,000…

“In addition, the implementation of Shari’a in our generation harms Shari’a itself, as well as the Islamic nation – which will become a world joke for [dictating] amputating the hand of someone who stole ‘a quarter of a dinar,’ stoning [adulterous] lovers, publicly giving 1,000 lashes to anyone who imbibes a glass of wine, and breaking the necks of [Muslims] who adopted another religion or of those who do not act according to any religion.

“Moreover, the day will come when the U.S. will use our violation of the Human Rights Convention as an excuse to occupy us and make us into other Indians [and do to us what they did to them]. This is because it is clear today, in the era of globalization, that any internal problem not dealt with by deep-rooted reform becomes an international problem…”

‘The Demand to Implement Shari’a Today is Absurd and Ill-Intentioned’

“The demand to implement Shari’a today is absurd and ill-intentioned. It indicates its supporters’ ignorance both of Islamic history and of the aims of Shari’a. The Prophet Muhammad did not implement Shari’a fully because [ Shari’a ] was not revealed to him all at once but gradually, over more than 20 years, in response to problems that arose with the organization of the new nation and in response to the challenges [posed] by the Children of Israel in Al-Madina…

“[Likewise], an important part of the Koran was abrogated because every time the social, economic, and security circumstances of the Islamic nation developed, the previous verses, which were no longer appropriate [in light of] the new changes, were abrogated…

“[Furthermore,] Islam urges the use of logic and wisdom. The role of the Prophet was not only to declare the revelations and interpret the Koranic text, but also to get [the people] accustomed to using logic… For this reason, the abrogation of Koranic verses did not end with the death of the Prophet – because social conditions did not freeze in place, but continued their constant movement from the simple to the complex.”

‘The Four Righteous Caliphs Continued [in the Path of the Prophet], Abrogating and Amending’

“The four Righteous Caliphs continued [in the path of the Prophet] and abrogated and amended the verses connected to the commandments between man and his fellow [man], in accordance with the Shari’a principles based on encouraging good deeds and refraining from evil deeds.

“Thus, for example, [the First Caliph] Abu Bakr abrogated the verse ‘Alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts have [recently] been reconciled to [Islam] [Koran 9:60]’ – that is, [Abu Bakr eliminated the grant] to those who had newly joined Islam, while the Prophet continued to give this Zakat [charitable grant] to them throughout his life. It is interesting that none of the Prophet’s Companions argued with him about this, or accused him of deviating from Islam – like people today hasten to accuse [others] of betrayal and apostasy.

“Abu Bakr’s argument when he abrogated this verse was based on logic, not on tradition: ‘Islam has become stronger, and we have no need for them [i.e. those who have newly joined Islam]’ Why? Because the balance of power between the Muslims and the polytheists had changed from the situation that existed when the verse was revealed. Previously, the [Muslim] nation was weak, and needed to entice people with material temptations so they would join. But when it became stronger, both numerically and with regard to its [military] preparedness, it no longer needed this…

“According to this logic, which is open to the innovations of life and sets the public [wellbeing] over the text of the Koran or the Sunna, [the Second Caliph] Omar bin Al-Khattab abrogated the Koranic punishment for theft in the year Al-Ramada [18 in the Muslim calendar], the year that famine struck the Arabian Peninsula. [He did so] even though the verse clearly and absolutely orders hand amputation: ‘As for the thief, both male and female, cut off their hands. It is the reward for their own deeds. [Koran 5:38].’

“The reason why [this punishment was abrogated] was a change in the Muslim nation’s strategic situation in Omar’s day, in contrast to the situation in the day of the Prophet. The nation had become a conquering [nation], and had [developed] a mighty military program – to topple the Persian and Byzantine empires. Such objectives cannot be achieved with a military consisting of one-armed men, and in the year Al-Ramada, Mecca and Al-Madina alone had 15,000 thieves, and doubtless the number [of thieves] in the rest of the Arabian Peninsula was many times greater…

“[The Third Caliph] Uthman bin ‘Affan went even farther than his two predecessors in abrogating texts in the Sunna and the Koran – even in the sphere of ritual between man and God. He prayed at Mina, while the Prophet and [the previous Caliphs] Abu Bakr and Omar abandoned this prayer. Also, he introduced many changes unfamiliar to Muslims in the deeds between man and his fellow [man] – which aroused outbreaks against him and led to his cruel murder.

“For example, he introduced new Persian [-style] taxes, when the Koran and the Sunna recognized only the Zakat and the Kharaj [land tax], and preferred to give his family state jobs and funds from the Muslim treasury…

“Also, the Fourth Caliph Ali bin Abu Taleb acted no differently than his three predecessors, placing what he thought was the best interests of the [Muslim] nation over the text of the Koran and the Sunna… [Thus for example] he invented the punishment for [imbibing] wine… [Imbibing wine] is forbidden in the Koran…: ‘Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows are an abomination [and] Satan’s handwork: Eschew such (abomination) [Koran 5:90].’ However, the Koran had not determined a punishment for anyone violating these prohibitions… The Prophet had not punished anyone who drank wine, and even Abu Bakr had not, and apparently also Omar had not…

“But the Imam Ali [did so because] he was horrified by the worsening of alcohol consumption and by the grave sins stemming from it during the period after the spread of the [Muslim] occupation, at a time when the booty flowed abundantly to Mecca and Al-Madina, and corruption and drunkenness proliferated there.

“In an attempt to be rid of this corruption, he did not hesitate to differ from what was said in the Koran and the Sunna, and to invent a punishment for wine-drinkers…”

‘The Flaw Lies in Reliance upon a Literal Reading of the Koran and Sunna’

“The flaw [in understanding Shari’a ] lies in the reliance on a literal reading of the Koran and Sunna, instead of an allegorical and rational reading that sets the best interests of the nation over the texts of its heritage – as did the best of [our] ancient, righteous patriarchs who made us a nation among the advanced nations, that set logic above tradition and placed the best interests of flesh and blood man over the rituals of their forefathers.

“If we do not turn [in this direction] swiftly and with maximum determination, we will remain a nation of the agrarian era that has no place in an era of industrial revolutions that follow each other…”, September 9, 2004. Abrogation is a method known in Islam by the technical names of Nasekh and mansoukh which offers a solution to the contradictions between Koranic verses. According to this method, the Koran includes verses that were subsequently abrogated by verses revealed at a later stage, and only the later verses are binding upon Muslims.


78 Responses to “Reform In Islam”

  1. cerebate Says:

    Hey eagle
    Some words of praise for you 🙂 by Awake on Jihad Watch
    “Eagle, the site host, whom I believe has good intentions, has been corraled by those of less unsavory character, like cerebate”

    Let me know if i have corraled you 🙂
    I think being called an unsavory character by a jihadwatch regular is a compliment!
    keep up the good work

  2. Shiva Says:

    Well Eagle

    May-be before you clip and paste an article, wouldnt it be better to do a little reseach.

    Because in the above post, you have made a major goof, which only supports what I say about you in my blog.

    Any way it is your blog, so I think it up to you to how you want to appear to others.

    Now the question is do you stand for what you have written above….

  3. awake Says:


    There are several things that I deem as inconsistent in this posting. I believe, like you, that the word Muslim and Islam are not completely interchangeable.

    First off:

    “I was a little disappointed that when I posted the letter which was sent 5 years ago on the anniversary of 9/11, I still saw people questioning all Muslims because of the actions of a few.”

    My response personally was that the examples the author used was a weak attempt at religious moral equivalence and in bad taste. My comment said nothing of all Muslims.

    “They seem to be having their own “dark ages”. If we are honest with ourselves we can start a list of the violence done in the name of Christianity.”

    To what purpose? What would be the relevance of these instances outside of simple historical research compared to what you are attempting to do here, address the problem of current “radical” Islam. (god, I hate that term)

    The article from the lecturer is a pretty good one. At least it addresses the historical occurences of abrogation in Islam, my intital question to you when I first arrived here, but it does not go nearly deep enough, but his points are well taken, regarding Islam in it’s infancy as opposed to when it gained in strength and number of adherents to it.

    I agree that the literal interpretation of the Qur’an is problematic. The Hadith and Sira are not perceived as divine, so I don’t know what the religious moral conundrum amongst Muslims there really is whether to follow them literally. In that sense they are similar to the Christian texts.

    Never mind cerebate’s nonsense. I truly wish the best for you and your blog. I also appreciate you going through the trouble of beginning to address abrogation, which I believe you have not done before. You do not need to be a Muslim to study the various aspects of Islam.

    The literal reading of the Qur’an is the impetus for the jihadists. That much is obvious, at least to me. If and when this indoctrinization ceases to exist in the Islamic community, we will have no need to speak of these issues anymore.

    I am so hopeful that this will occur, but not banking on it anytime soon. Until then Islam must be scrutinized.

    You have done well for yourself here tonight in my estimation. Your research of abrogation needs to go much further, but it is a start. Try researching the order of the revelation of the verses of the Qur’an. It is quite interesting.

    Oh, and by the way, when they held the free democratic elections in Iraq after Huussein was disposed, they based their constitution off of Shari’ah. That point should not be lost or go unnoticed without further research. No one wants Shari’ah implemented here in the West, except the Islamists.

    New word for research on your list: ijtihad.



  4. Eagle Says:


    Thank you very much and ditto to you too. I appreciate your contribution on my blog. You are always welcome here. 😀 Here to all those unsavory characters in the world. 😀

  5. Eagle Says:


    I have a stack of books on Islam, although I must confess I have not had the time to read them all. The last several posts have been to address the fact that all Muslims are not…you should know the rest by now. I fully intend, and hope that I will soon be able to get back to my normal topic.

    Over the next few days I will be putting up more stuff such as this with links to sites where Muslim scholars, and Muslims in general discuss the issues you have brought up.

    I haven’t been into the blog writing business very long, and there are a ton of things I want to write about. I have already explained why I started this series of posts. Regardless of what is said and done, some people will never believe it so there comes a time when I have to cut my losses and get back to my main topic.

    I must say I was surprised today to check my blog stats and find that someone from a radical website came to visit. I hope he doesn’t tell his radical friends that I have been snitching them out!! 😀

    I appreciate your input, my only request is that you try and appreciate mine. We all have differing views when it comes to Islam. I have stated mine plenty of times. I don’t expect anyone else to adopt my point of view I only ask that you respect it and in so doing you will be respecting me.

    Some peoples remarks drip with sarcasm and anger. If someone asks me a question and I don’t know the answer, then some of the people who comment resort to name calling, and acting like because I don’t know an answer I should not be allowed to write a blog. There is no need for that. 😦 You can disagree without being an ass!!

    My attitude is, if you feel I am that ignorant, then why waste your time here?? I have no intention of even reading the post of someone who acts like that. The first sign of being a jerk and I will stop reading their comment. I don’t need to think like you (not you literally) to be of some value in the quest of informing on radical Islam.

    The bottom line is, your not going to change my mind about Islam. I don’t believe that all of Islam is radical or believes in the radicals. If my mind gets changed it will be from my research not someone beating me about the head and shoulders. That isn’t directed at you personally, I am just making my point of my beliefs. 😀

    It’s 3 in the morning and I still haven’t read all the comments for today. Guess that will wait for tomorrow. Goodnight folks.

  6. Eagle Says:


    OK I’ll bite, what is sooo wrong with this post??

  7. Elric66 Says:

    As my friend salahudin said, Islam hasn’t been around as long as Judaism or Christianity. They seem to be having their own “dark ages”.

    So are we to wait a few hundred years for Islam to get civilized?

  8. Elric66 Says:

    Eagle said,

    ‘I have a stack of books on Islam, although I must confess I have not had the time to read them all. ‘

    By who? Who do you use as sources?

  9. Shiva Says:

    What is the point of having lots of sources when you cannot give the authors due respect

    Dr. Iqbal Al-Gharbi, lecturer in psychology at Al-Zaytouna University, Tunisia,

    Happens to be a women


  10. awake Says:


    With all due respect, I was trying to give you some background information and areas of exploration to further your blog’s intent of clarifying the difference of Islam and “radical” Islam and your denouncement of the latter. That is your intent here, right?

    When I first posed the question of abrogation to you the other day, you said you would refer the question to a Muslim poster, since you could not accurately answer. As expected, he never dropped by to join in the discussion.

    It is obvious to me that you are new to blogging. That is not a slight, merely my observation. I was trying to compel you to research the subject that you appear to feel so strongly about, hence your dedication to the subject on this blog.

    If I am becoming a burden, just say so, and I will leave, but from my point of view, you do not have unmanagable traffic here as of yet.

  11. awake Says:


    I agree. What is the “major goof” from Eagle’s post, as proclaimed by shiva. I am not saying that thwere might not be one, only that I haven’t discovered it yet.

  12. awake Says:


    Oooof! Yeah that one hurts a little bit. Thanks for pointing that out. Your cut and paste comment is now validated.
    Please ignore my post directly above. 🙂

  13. Elric66 Says:


    Dont bother asking him what the difference between Islam and radical Islam. He even deleted my link on the “here are the moderates” thread where I showed that Osama has a 46 approval rating in Pakistan. The same Pakistan he was gushing about.He isnt interested in the truth. He is here to misinform about the threat of Islam.

  14. Eagle Says:


    I was not refering to you personally. I understand what you are trying to do. I also appreciate the fact that when you comment to me you are not disrespectful. I’m not shy about letting someone know if I don’t want them around. I have no problem with you.

  15. Eagle Says:


    YOu know why I deleted your link. You have spammed my other blog with your links. Your lucky I am even letting your post stay up. I am sick of you and your disrespect. As per usual, you insult me,

    “I am not really sure Eagle is a Christian. I would think a true Christian would be more concerned about Islam’s 1400 year intolerant history of Christianity.”

    You obviously have no concept of what a “true” Christian is. Just because I have not written the way you want me to, does not mean I am not a “true” Christian. Maybe instead of spending so much time on my blog, criticizing everything I say, you should read the Bible and find out what a “true” Christian really is.

  16. Eagle Says:


    That’s my big goof, I miss spoke and said he instead of she?? Get a life…

  17. Ameriki Says:

    It is clearly within Islamic jurisprudence to engage in offensive military Jihad to convert, subjugate, or kill all non-Muslims. It is explained thusly : There is a concept called “Abrogation” in the Qur’an, and that is: The Qur’an was (supposedly) revealed to Muhammad in a sequence of events, the latter verses supercede and nullifies the earlier verses. Out of the whole Qur’an, there are 124 verses that teach some tolerance towards non-Muslims…but here is the striking fact….all of these verses are void, and were abrogated by the last verse (supposedly) revealed upon Muhammad, and that is verse 9:5 “Fight and slay the pagans [Christians] wherever ye find them and seize them, confine them, and lie in wait for them in every place of ambush” (Surah 9:5). Suyuti (One of the most respected authorities in Islam) in his book “Istenbat al tanzeel” says: “Every thing in the Qur’an about forgiveness is abrogated by verse 9:5.”Al-Shawkani in his book “Alsaylu Jarar” (4:518-519) says: “Islam is unanimous about fighting the unbelievers and forcing them to Islam or submitting and paying Jiziah (special tax paid only by Christians or Jews) or being killed. [The verses] about forgiving them are abrogated unanimously by the obligation of fighting in any case.” Finally here is what Muhammad the prophet of Islam himself said: Ibn Haban in his Sahih, vol. 14, p. 529, narrates: Muhammad said: “I swear by Him who has my soul in his hands, I was sent to you with nothing but slaughter.” This concept in Islam is regarded my most scholars in the Islamic world, as a pretext for global war in the name of Islam. These are not my words, as they come within Islam itself. Simple research on the reader’s part will confirm what Islam means for you in the west, if we take as example how minorities of the Islamic world are treated. Trust me the truth is out there google Coptic+Christians+Egypt and explore a whole new world of repression, hate, and discrimination that will blow your mind. This is what Europeans will be giving to their children if you follow current demographic models. The moral equivalence, and relativism to Christianity is intellectually disingenuous and a complete red herring, and will be the death of us all if we cannot get Muslims to face the ugliness that resides within their faith. Honestly, name one Muslim majority country where minorities can live freely, and free of oppression? Please do it for me, because you can’t, and you know it! Should we in the west allow immigration from Muslims countries while this is going on? I want to see one Muslim come on here and honestly refute what I have said without using relativistic mantras, honestly deny the fact that a LARGE element within your faith uses these ideas to promote an imperialistic agenda. Until Muslims can come to grip with the harsh facts then the answer is no, because we are also importing these socially repugnant ideas along with them. If you look at population demographics in Europe what honest answer would lead me to believe that native Europeans could live like they do as minorities in their own countries?

  18. Shiva Says:

    That’s my big goof, I miss spoke and said he instead of she?? Get a life…

    Well that “miss-spoken” only confirms that you basically do not know what you are talking about, and that is a major goof..

  19. Eagle Says:

    Good Shiva, I know nothing, so get lost. There is nothing here for you.

  20. Eagle Says:


    Before I post your comments, who are you? I see where you are coming from. And I am not impressed. Post your answer in the comment thread and I will see it in moderation form.

  21. Ameriki Says:

    Eagle Says:
    September 13th, 2007 at 3:51 pm

    Before I post your comments, who are you? I see where you are coming from. And I am not impressed. Post your answer in the comment thread and I will see it in moderation form.

    I am a concerned citizen. If you disagree refute please.

  22. Eagle Says:


    Are you Muslim??

  23. Ameriki Says:

    My faith? First answer why it should matter? Indulge me … I’m not being evasive.

  24. Ameriki Says:

    It is your site, and you have the right to censor, as you please, but I don’t have time for games.

  25. Eagle Says:

    No problem, I am asking because of where you came to me from. If you are a Muslim who believe’s that it is ok to kill in the name of Allah, that it is your duty to go to a place that was minding their own business and attack, then your not welcome here, simple as that.

    The website that I show you came from, says its ok to do those kind of things and trys to convince moderate Muslims that they are wrong.

  26. Ameriki Says:

    I’m no Muslim, I’m Christian. If you came away from reading my post thinking I’m Muslim I’d read it again. I do not expect you’ll post me, but let me say there are some pressing issues, which need candid HONEST debate. By the nature of the issue … this will not be pleasant … to put it mildly. If you are a Christian, as you say you are, you should be concerned about having a free and honest debate about what is happening to minorities of your faith in the Islamic world, because these conditions could be on its way to a neighborhood near you.

  27. Eagle Says:

    Just checking, I don’t want any radical Islamist commenting on my blog. It appeared to me that you came from one of their websites.

  28. Eagle Says:

    For the most part, I have allowed all comments here. As long as people are respectful of other peoples opinions. As far as Elric, we have a history in my other blog. You came late to the party. This blog is about radical Islam, but I had to address some other issues as well.

  29. Elric66 Says:

    Did Mohammed practice “radical” Islam Eagle?

  30. Elric66 Says:

    “If you are a Christian, as you say you are, you should be concerned about having a free and honest debate about what is happening to minorities of your faith in the Islamic world, because these conditions could be on its way to a neighborhood near you.”

    You would think so Ameriki but he seems to want to defend Islam more that Christianity. I find it odd as well. Matter of fact, a Muslim Med student was arrested in Dearbornistan with an assaut rifle while wearing cammo. It might be coming sooner than he thinks.

  31. Eagle Says:

    I have no doubt what is going on in other countries and what could be coming here, that is one of the reasons I started writing about radical Islam. I am very concerned about the state of affairs. And know all to well what can happen. Belittling Muslims that don’t think that way, is counter productive. That is the main reason I started the current series of posts.
    Some think that is it OK to belittle me because I am not writing the way they want me too. That’s counter productive as well. You can still have impact without being an ass. You can get your point across without being disrespectful.
    That’s the readers digest version.

  32. Eagle Says:

    The only reason I felt the need to defend Islam Elric is because you are an ass and couldn’t respect my feelings on my other blog. I am sick of you and your disrespect, everytime I see your user ID name I get angry. You are within seconds of getting banned from this blog as well!!!

  33. Elric66 Says:

    Honestly, what in Islam’s 1400 year history is worth defending? Just name one Islamic country that should be a role model for other Islamic countries to follow.

  34. Eagle Says:

    As I have told you a million times before, go write your own blog and leave me alone.

  35. Ameriki Says:

    Eagle I understand your point, which is that you want to bring people into the fold from different perspectives, interfaith dialogue if you will. I was in the same mental place that you are in about 2 years ago … looking for that voice of moderation, a bridge from one culture to another to start some healing. All I have to say is good luck, because you’ll be lucky to get one shred of honesty, or candid meaningful discussion. More than likely all you’ll get, unless you are appeasing, is anger, or platitudes … well like all of your Muslim posters here. Know one thin though … I respect your effort … and know you will come to the truth in all this over time.

  36. Eagle Says:


    What Muslim posters here?? I don’t have any Muslim posters here. I have an apostate, and a bunch of non-Muslims. I hope I have at least some Muslim readers if not posters. And you are right I do want different perspectives. But more than anything I want Muslims to read my blog, because I post what the radicals say. I don’t think the average Muslim has any idea what awaits them if the radicals get their way. Just like I don’t think most American even consider for a moment that the radicals could win. I think we don’t just have Muslims who need to wake up, we have Americans too. It can be a curse to live in a country as powerful and advanced as America, you can begin to think nothing can ever hurt you. You would be dead wrong. When you read “about me”, you will see what I think about that. It wouldn’t take much to take us out. If that happens the rest of the world is screwed too. I do my bit here, I try and do it respectfully. It is my contribution to the war on terror. How many Muslims do you think read “Jihad Watch”??

  37. Elric66 Says:


    Couldnt name just one Islamic country? You would think with 57 or so Islamic countries, you could name one real “moderate” one.


    In all honesty, I dont think he is interested in the truth. If he was, we would be having some honest deabte. All he can do with with me is call me names and tell me to write my own blog. Intersting enough, he gets angry when he doesnt get straight answers on jihadist sites.

  38. Eagle Says:

    Elric the only thing I have to say to you is get lost. I’ve said it all before. It’s funny, Ameriki comes here and in one afternoon knows what I am trying to do. I have been spelling it out to you for over a month and your either too dense to get it, or don’t care. So why should I care what you have to say, and why should I allow you to continue to disrespect me.

    Let me break it down for you. Ever watch cops?? Do you see all those women who continue to stay with boyfriends or husbands who abuse them?? I never had any respect for them, no cop has respect for people that allow themselves to be disrespected and/or hit upon time after time.

    Knowing that’s how I feel, just how much longer do you think I am going to allow you to keep it up??

  39. Elric66 Says:

    Just because I ask some questions? Im not allowed to even do that? If you are going to defend Islam, you are better served by actually justifying your position, not by attacking me.

  40. Eagle Says:


    In your opinion you already know it all, you have made that perfectly clear, so your question was not a question.

    You also already know what and why I do what I do. What and how I believe, is plain to see in every post I have written. You should know that if you can read. So what your point is, to harass me like you have been for the past month, I don’t know.

    But as I told you before, I am not here for you. I’ve seen your kind before, I have never been impressed with them, and thus, you. Just go away, your not welcomed here.

  41. Eagle Says:

    One more thing. It appears that if you read any of my posts, you will see where I have justified my position. But I know you don’t read anything I write. You are merely here looking for a pen pal or someone stupid enough to argue with you.

  42. Elric66 Says:


    You dodge and deflect. You never give a straight answer. CAIR taught you alot I will give you that.

  43. Elric66 Says:

    ‘The Four Righteous Caliphs Continued [in the Path of the Prophet]”

    They sure did. Conquering everything in its path and oppressing every non Muslim it came across. Righteous indeed.

  44. cerebate Says:

    Did Mohammed practice “radical” Islam Eagle?
    You seem to be obsessed with mohammed and what he did or did not do. And you keep asking for definitive answer to what people did 1000+ years back from us folks. Have you considered seeing a psychiatrist for your unhealthy obsession?
    Anyway my answer is No. Or no more than Moses practiced radical jewishness or the God in the old testament practiced radical christianity.

    “Just name one Islamic country that should be a role model for other Islamic countries to follow.”
    Im curious what your educational qualifications are(if at all any). Anyone who has studied rudimentary history/politics can give you more than one example. However you havent stated what you will do if we can name one country(turkey).

    Now what ? You seem to excel in making statements of the form I challenge you to do so and so. And when we do answer it , you move onto the next challenge. Are you an amnesiac as well or is it that your attention span is limited?

  45. awake Says:

    Hey, Elric66 and Ameriki,

    I was just waiting for the “secular humanist” cerebate to chime in.

    cerebate wrote:

    “However you havent stated what you will do if we can name one country(turkey).”

    Well, cerebate, Turkey, historically since Kamal Attaturk abolished the Caliphate in 1924 was a good example of a propsperous, secular-run country, albeit via the military.

    Unfotunately, all that appears to have changed with the recent elections, empowering Gul and the Islamic party. Indeed, all good things must come to an end, it seems.

    Islamic theocracy, historically, is a fine examples of a failed society, unless a recent example can be provided that proves otherwise, of course. “I like to think that I have an open mind.” 🙂


    Enough with the idle threat banter with Elric66 already. Either ban him or allow him to express his opinion through his postings. Man on Man catfights are not enjoyable to the other four of us who post here. He is simply, brutally straightforward. It is in his nature, but his value, based on the context he provides, should not be underestimated, in my most humble opinion.



  46. Shiva Says:

    It is my contribution to the war on terror. How many Muslims do you think read “Jihad Watch”??

    How many muslims read “Jihad watch”?… Quite a lot

  47. Shiva Says:

    I was in the same mental place that you are in about 2 years ago … looking for that voice of moderation, a bridge from one culture to another to start some healing.

    Yes, I think that many of us go through that phase. We are not prepared to face something as alien as the moslem mind-set.

    Eagle has yet to learn that when it gets to the nitty-gritty, the moderate moslems will always side with the radicals.

  48. Shiva Says:

    Now this will make my day

    Indonesia: No Special Treatment For Bali Bombers

    CILACAP (Central Java), Sept 13 (Bernama) — There will be no special treatment for the three main perpetrators of the October 12, 2002 Bali bombings — Amrozi, Imam Samudra and Ali Gufron, the head of the State Correctional Institution in Nusakambangan, Sudijanto, said here on Thursday.

    “We will give no special treatment to Amrozi et al after their judicial review request has been rejected by the Supreme Court (MA),” Antara, Indonesian news agency quoted Sudijanto as saying here.

    However, he added he had yet to receive a copy of the Supreme Court’s decision rejecting Amrozi’s judicial review request.

    He even admitted there had yet to be coordination with the Attorney General’s Office, the High Prosecution Office and the District Prosecution Office concerning the date of Amrozi et al’s execution.

    Asked if the families of the three deathrow convicts would be permitted to visit them at Nusakambangan Correctional Institute, Sudijanto said they would.

    Meanwhile, Bali police chief Insp Gen Paulus Purwoko in Denpasar on Wednesday said he supported proposals that the execution of Amrozi et al be carried out outside the resort island, for example in Nusakambangan, Central Java.

    “Although it is beyond my authority, I support proposals that three Bali bombers — Amrozy, Imam Samudra, and Ali Gufron — be executed in Nusakambangan because that would perhaps be better for Bali,” Purwoko said here on Wednesday.

    Speaking to reporters after opening a technical meeting on Bali police public relations affairs, Purwoko said Bali could be considered to be an international zone because many foreign tourists come to the island every year.

    “Bali is also a peaceful region in Indonesia, and therefore we have to protect and maintain it. We don’t have to see the execution carried out here because the important thing is that the legal process takes place,” Purwoko said.

    Earlier on Monday, Purwoko suggedsted that Amrozi et al who were on death row be executed in Bali so as to improve the country’s image, that of Bali in particular, in the world community’s eyes but it seemed that he had changed his mind.

    Purwoko said now that the Supreme Court had rejected the request of the three Bali bombers — Amrozy, Imam Samudra and Ali Gufron — to review their death sentences, their execution should be carried out in Bali because doing so would be good for the country’s international image.

    But noting that the three convicts were currently being held at a maximum-security jail in Nusakambangan, Central Java, Purwoko admitted that if the main consideration was practicality, the execution should be done on the prison island.

  49. Elric66 Says:


    Well since Mohammed was the Islamic prophet and Muslims see him as the perfect man, yes he is important. I do find it ironic that I give him more importance in respect to Islam than you do. So you are saying that when Mohammed killed, oppressed and conquered in the name of Islam, he was being mainstreamed, not radical?

    As for Turkey. You are right and you are wrong. Turkey is a country that is Muslim. But it is secular in nature, Kemal Ataturk didnt want Islam in any part of the government. He knew the dangers. Get back with me in 10 years and see if you still feel that way since Turkey is sliding into an Islamic state. Will that be good, or bad?

  50. Elric66 Says:


    I think Eagle would love Naseem. 🙂

  51. Shiva Says:

    I think Eagle would love Naseem.

    AAAAAAAAAM Naseem the dreaded “wild and slutty,” Paki katoey (lady boy)

    She /he even called me KUTA SALA [slang for fucking crazy dog] about three years ago

    I would hate to think what would happen to Eagle if she/he was let loose here.

    Strange you should think of Naseem, as earlier to-day I was looking for some of his/her more famous comments.

  52. in2thefray Says:

    “Man on Man catfights are not enjoyable to the other four of us who post here” hear hear. Of course the only person who “posts” here is Eagle. Everyone else comments.
    Is converting Eagle some divine requirement ? I ask since there is such seeming fervor to do so and all comments inevitably seem to race off topic.
    Theocracy is a danger no matter the faith. The faith itself is not the threat. By highlighting radical Islam and its alter majority plain ole Islam Eagle is actually more on your side than y’all will ever admit.
    Islamism is like it’s fellow ism’s. They are the threat. The German language and national identity wasn’t the threat to the world. Nazism was.
    A Muslim in a mosque isn’t the same as an Islamist.

  53. Elric66 Says:


    Might have to invite Naseem here. Eagle would love her.

  54. awake Says:

    in2thefray wrote:
    “A Muslim in a mosque isn’t the same as an Islamist.”

    Unless, of course, its some random Imam calling for the death of America and such. Yep, I am sure there is no Islamism, Islamists, radical Islamists, Islamic extremeists, Islamofacists, militant Islamists, Islamic terrorists, occuring in Mosques.

    Did I leave any descriptions out of people commiting violence with absolutely no correlation to Islam itself?

  55. in2thefray Says:

    You list the problem well. Islamists and Islamism is the problem.
    The example of Germany is best. Ism’s rely on fear and the exploitation of human passions. That people have been able to use religion to control others-that’s a shock to you ? There are examples of mosques in America where people have left upon hearing things like you say. There are mosques in America that have followers that don’t leave. The latter are aligned with Sunni’s specifically Wahhabi like Saudi Arabia. btw Wahhabism ???Yeah

  56. awake Says:

    The problem in not the anti-Semite, but rather anti-Semitism.

    The problem is not the Nazi, but rather Nazism.

    The problem is not Islam, but rather Islamism.

    That is what all that nonsense sounds like to me.

    ism /ˈɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
    –noun a distinctive doctrine, theory, system, or practice: This is the age of isms.


    [Origin: extracted from words with the suffix -ism]

  57. in2thefray Says:

    No twisting please.I opened with: ” You list the problem well. Islamists and Islamism is the problem.”
    The problem is the Islamist and Islamism Not the Muslim and Islam. There is a difference.

  58. Elric66 Says:

    tell us, what is the difference between Islamism and Islam. When Mohammed expanded Islam by the sword and assassinated his enemies, what that Islam or Islamism?

  59. in2thefray Says:

    That’s a fair question.Islam is a religion.It’s words in a book,it’s a belief system for it’s followers. Islamism is when you take Islam to support political agendas.Islamism via theocracy enjoys an easy road to totalitarianism. The faith was rapidly interconnected to “government” but eventually settled.So essentially both.For many years Islamic culture existed peacefully.This is Islam. ….Now that you’ve picked yourself up of the floor. Later governments in nations that established independent sovereignty and as certain sect (isms) evolved they embraced Islamism. Saudi Arabia 1920’s for ex.A monarchy that aligns itself with Wahhabism assuring it’s control. To parallel. A Christian democracy that is secular,the voters respect that the leader has faith. (Bush,Reagan,Washington) However we’ve been blessed with not having a theocracy. A totalitarian government using an ism.This admittedly deserves a fuller explanation but I hope this provides some understanding my point.

  60. Elric66 Says:

    “Islamism is when you take Islam to support political agendas.”

    Islam is political.

    “For many years Islamic culture existed peacefully.”

    LOL Where and when was this?

  61. awake Says:

    in2thefray wrote:

    “No twisting please.”

    “The problem is the Islamist and Islamism Not the Muslim and Islam. There is a difference.”

    That semantical argument was, and continues to be, the text book definition of twisting, in my opinion, and the reason that there is a distrust of Islam and it’s supporters.

    Islamic apologists always try to deflect attention from the ideology of Islam and transfer it to the individual acts of the Islamists, or jihadists, or terrorists, or whatever. By definition, they are all Muslims, but that is not the point, for this debate is never about the individual Muslim comparative to Islam, and Muslims can be categorized no further than self-proclaimed followers of Islam.

    It can be semantically argued that the problem is not “terror” but rather “terrorism”, performed by “terrorists”. “Terror” a tactic, effectively cannot be considered a problem in and of itself. That is a valid argument.

    you also wrote:

    “That’s a fair question.Islam is a religion.It’s words in a book,it’s a belief system for it’s followers.”

    Agreed. The words in the Qur’an are a belief system by some or many or whatever. That also includes the 9th sura, which is also in the book.

    “Islamism is when you take Islam to support political agendas.”

    I can argue, that to some many or whatever, that it is a theocratic agenda, a mandate from God to His believers.

    This is at the core of the problem. Semantical arguments are valueless in this regard. The impetus for Islamism, or “taking” or using Islam, is inherent in Islam itself. Without the call to arms vereses against the unbelievers, a call which some, many or whatever deem to be a divine mandate, there would be no issue here.

    No one is concerned of the divine mandate of giving alms for the poor.

    These rationalizations need to change or nothing will change. It is no different than another similar angle to call unsanctioned Jihad as Hiraba instead. To the non-Muslim who falls victim to it, there is no difference in the semantical description of the act itself, for they are no less dead.

    Honestly, do you think we as non-believers should take any solace in the proposal that violent aggression by the Islamists is merely Islamism, and not Islam itself?

  62. in2thefray Says:

    Honestly, do you think we as non-believers should take any solace in the proposal that violent aggression by the Islamists is merely Islamism, and not Islam itself?

    I think you,Elric and those like you need to do just that. You see the Islamists need to be defeated and that will likely mean killed. If you want to kill every Muslim on the planet go ahead it’s overkill though and you won’t like what it makes you.

  63. Eagle Says:

    Read the latest post. There you will have just a small bit of what Muslims think of al Qaeda and what they did and do.

  64. Eagle Says:


    do you mind if I put you in my blogroll?

  65. in2thefray Says:

    You’re already on mine. I didn’t tell you ‘cuz I don’t require reciprocity. Shorter answer go ahead.

  66. Eagle Says:

    Just cking, I like your comments and since your on salahudin’s blogroll, you can’t be all that bad 😀 LOL

  67. cerebate Says:

    awake, elric
    Yes turkey is(was?!?) secular. It also has 90%+ muslims who believe in Islam – definitely a muslim country. I havent heard your explanations for it though since it is your belief that Islam is the problem so it should have been a problem in turkey too , isnt it.
    And no, Turkey still is secular and is still a democracy the last i heard, the people you pointed out were elected. So you may not agree with the elected people , but its still a moderate contemporary example. (There are others, but im sure you can go brush up on contemporary politics)

    Oh and Awake , your mind is really open, everything we say just sails right through, must be the absence of a brain methinks.(sorry couldnt resist)

  68. awake Says:


    Good luck here. I hope one day you see the light. I will post here no more, I absolutely promise.
    The “intellectual” discourse level here, unfortunately, is well below my standards.

    Give me a shout out on Jihadwatch, when and if you get at least 20 commentators.

    By the way, since you made it clear that this site message is against “radical” Islam, I ask you, do you actually ever post an article about “radical” Islam, because in my short time here, I haven’t seen any to date.

  69. cerebate Says:

    Didnt see your question
    “So you are saying that when Mohammed killed, oppressed and conquered in the name of Islam, he was being mainstreamed, not radical? ”
    Im saying no more than moses, the old testament god, David,Solomon, or Abraham. I also find it futile to judge events of 1000+ years with todays sensibilities. You keep throwing up words like pedophile, murderer. Answer me this then(Again not moral equivalence because i do not justify any of these nor do i offer them as excuses)
    what was the allowed age of marriage in america 400-500 years ago?. How many native Indians were killed by the settlers? And finally are your ancestors pedophiles and mass murderers?

    “Turkey is a country that is Muslim. But it is secular in nature,”
    Wow , so you admit, Turkey is a muslim country that is secular by nature?

  70. Shiva Says:

    “Turkey is a country that is Muslim. But it is secular in nature,”

    Chronology of the Establishment of a Secular Nation

    February 21
    A Turkish boycott of Armenian businesses is declared by the Ittihadists. Dr. Nazim travels throughout the provinces to implement the boycott.

    February 26
    The police spy David notifies Reshad Bey, Chief of the Political Section of the Constantinople Police Department that he is providing the names, biographies, pictures, and speeches about reform, as well as other data, of two thousand leading Armenians.

    July 28
    Negotiations are started between the Turkish and German Imperial governments.

    August 8
    Censorship of all telegraphic communication is announced by the government.

    August 18
    Looting is reported in Sivas, Diyarbekir, and other provinces, under the guise of collecting war contributions. Stores owned by Armenian and Greek merchants are vandalized.

    August 18
    1,080 shops owned by Armenians are burned in the city of Diyarbekir.

    August 28
    Turkish troops are garrisoned in Armenian schools and churches in Sivas Province. In the city of Sivas, 56,000 soldiers of the 10th Army Corps are quartered in and around the Christian districts.

    September 11
    The Armenian National Assembly, composed of civil and religious representatives, meets in Constantinople and advises Armenians in the provinces to remain calm in the face of provocation.

    September 27
    News reaches Constantinople about the demand made by the government of the Armenian population in Zeitun to turn in its weapons, including all types of knives.

    September 30
    The government distributes arms to the Muslim residents of the town of Keghi in Erzerum Province on the excuse that the Armenians there were unreliable.

    October 1
    Nazaret Chavush, the most notable Armenian leader in Zeitun, is murdered on the order of Haidar Pasha, governor of Marash.

    October 7
    News reaches Constantinople of looting under the guise of war contributions in Shabin-Karahisar.

    October 10
    News that ‘the war contribution’ looting of Armenians was continuing in Diyarbekir Province.

    October 10
    In Zeitun, all the Armenian notables are called to a meeting. About three score attend and are immediately arrested.

    October 13
    News of requisitions imposed on Armenian businesses as ‘war contributions’ reaches Constantinople from every province.

    October 13
    News reaches Constantinople of starvation and the spread of disease in Sivas Province because of the desperate conditions created by the ‘war contributions’ campaign conducted against the Armenians.

    October 17
    Bands of chetes begin looting, violating women and children, and large-scale murdering in Erzerum Province

    October 17
    Leaders of the Armenian nationalist Dashnak party organization in Erzerum are arrested.

    November 9
    News from the interior of Turkey reaches the Armenian community of Constantinople that persecutions already exceed earlier actions against the Armenians.

    November 11
    A Proclamation of Jihad, directed against England, France, and Russia, is issued in Constantinople legitimating the formation of the chete organizations.

    November 13
    Unfounded accusations are launched against the Armenians that they had revolted and were preparing to join the Russian forces.

    November 14
    The village of Otsni in Erzerum Province is attacked at night by chete forces. The local Armenian priest and many other Armenians are killed. Every house is looted. The first attacks by chete forces on the Armenian villages of Erzerum are reported.

    November 18
    The Jihad Proclamation is read in all the provinces of the Ottoman Empire.

    November 19
    Mass executions of Armenian soldiers in the Turkish army takes place in various public squares for the purpose of terrorizing the Armenians, while with voluntary contributions, Armenians were building several hospitals for the use of the Turkish army through the Red Crescent Society.

    November 20
    Orders are issued from Constantinople instructing the provincial administrators to oust all Armenian functionaries in the service of the Ottoman government.

    November 21
    In Mush, Ittihadist agents distribute arms to the Turkish population after arousing them with false stories of Armenian outrages.

    November 23
    Previously undisturbed Armenian schools and churches in Sivas Province, together with many private residences, are requisitioned by the Turkish army for use as barracks. The carts, horses, and other travel equipment of the Armenian villagers in the provinces are confiscated.

    November 26
    Robbery and looting on a large scale is reported in Van Province.

    November 26
    The War Ministry distributes explosives, rifles, and other equipment to the irregular forces of the Special Organization (Teshkilati Mahsusa).

    November 26
    Enver’s uncle, Halil Pasha, the military governor of Constantinople, begins organizing Special Organization units in Constantinople by enrolling criminals released from prison.

    November 29
    Halil Pasha instructs the governor of Izmid (Izmit) to identify leaders for Special Organization units and to release criminals from prisons to join these bands.

    November 29
    The vice-governor of Izmid (Izmit) arms the Special Organization with weapons supplied by the War Ministry.

    November 29
    Chete forces consisting of intentionally released convicts are armed by the government in Van Province. In the region of Van requisitions take the form of open robbery and looting.

    November 30
    Having completed his job organizing the Special Organization in Artvin, Behaeddin Shakir is instructed to move on to Trebizond.

    November 30
    The central command of the Special Organization sends instruction for supplying the chete bands with money, vehicles, and others equipment.

    The beginning of a series of isolated murders to terrorize the Armenian population.

    December 1
    Reports reach Constantinople that raids by irregular chete forces on the Armenian villages of Erzerum Province are continuing.

    December 2
    Turks loot the properties of subjects of Allied nations.

    December 5
    Reports continue reaching Constantinople that chete raids on the Armenian villages of Erzerum Province are continuing.

    December 6
    Armenians are put to use as porters of army supplies in Erzerum, Trebizond, and Sivas Provinces under the worst of cold winter conditions for the purpose of letting them die of overwork and illness.

    December 23
    Foreign missionaries abandon the interior of Turkey as crosses on missions are broken by the Turks and replaced by crescents.


    January 5
    The Turkish government publicly charges that Armenian bakers in the army bakeries of Sivas were poisoning the bread of the Turkish forces. The bakers are cruelly beaten, despite the fact that a group of doctors prove the charge to be false by examining the bread and even eating it. As this marks an attempt on the part of the government to incite massacre, the government does not rescind the charge.

    January 8
    Turkish and Kurdish chetes (Halil Pasha’s “First Corps”) attack Armenian and Assyrian villages in northwest Persia. They remain around the city of Tavriz (Tabriz) and the city of Urmia from January 8 until January 29, 1915. From Urmia alone, more than 18,000 Armenians, together with many Assyrians and even Persian Muslims, flee to the Caucasus.


    August 26
    Anarchy spreads in Smyrna as the Turks press in on the city.

    September 9
    The advance guard of the Turkish Army enters Smyrna and pillages Armenian and Greek homes and stores. Armenians and Greeks are killed in the thousands. Religious institutions, including the Armenian Prelacy in Smyrna, are ransacked.

    September 13
    The burning of Smyrna by the Turks. Within 24 hours, 50,000 houses, 24 churches, 28 schools, 5 consulates, 7 clubs, 5 banks, and an unknown number of stores and warehouses are destroyed.


    October 29
    The Republic of Turkey is proclaimed by the Turkish Grand National Assembly with Mustafa Kemal as its President.


    August 22
    While addressing his military commanders at Obersalzburg, a week before the invasion of Poland, and the start of World War II, Adolph Hitler speaks of his orders “to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of Polish race or language,” and concludes his remarks by saying:


  71. cerebate Says:

    wow you have, let me see picked out incidents from 1915-1939. Im waiting for you to get upto speed with the current century.(yes i do know they elected a more religious president in the last election) Its quite fascinating to watch how you(and elric and awake etc.) have a problem when others mention history but are quite willing to go back to 50+ years if it suits your purpose.
    Turkey is a secular country and has been so before i was born. You can choose to be ignorant, thats your choice.

  72. Shiva Says:

    Turkey is a secular country and has been so before i was born.

    You can choose to be ignorant, thats your choice.

    It has been secular, thanks military intervention and rule.

  73. Eagle Says:

    If I may

    2004 reforms to Turkey’s Penal Code which were passed by an AK Party-dominated parliament have been nothing short of miraculous. To appreciate how the AK Party has turned upside down Islamist notions on women and their rights to sexual autonomy – and thereby signaled its own distance from Islamism – consider the following, quoted from the European Stability Initiative (ESI) June 2007 report “Sex and Power in Turkey: Feminism, Islam and the Maturing of Turkish Democracy”:

    All references to vague patriarchal constructs such as chastity, morality, shame, public customs or decency had been eliminated from the Penal Code.

    The new Penal Code treats sexual crimes as violations of individual women’s rights and not as crimes against society, the family or public morality.

    It criminalised rape in marriage, eliminated sentence reductions for honour killings, ended legal discrimination against non-virgin and unmarried women, criminalised sexual harassment in the workplace and treated sexual assault by members of the security forces as aggravated offences.

    Provisions on the sexual abuse of children have been amended to remove the possibility of under-age consent.

    As well as highlighting the AK Party’s willingness to traverse far beyond any Islamist notions of women’s rights, the reforms also signaled the party’s ability to listen and to work with Turkish civil society, particularly women’s groups which so successfully lobbied and campaigned for the reforms that they have since emerged as influential political players in their country.

    No wonder the ESI described the changes as revolutionary.

    “It was not just a victory for Turkish women, but also for Turkish democracy,” said the ESI, a Berlin-based non-profit research and policy institute. “With the new Penal Code, Turkey’s legislation entered the post-patriarchal era.”

  74. Eagle Says:

    According to the ESI report, a recent survey in Turkey shows Turks are becoming more religious in private – the number of people who say that they are ‘very’ or ‘quite’ religious increased from 31 to 61 percent between 1999 and 2006.

    But the same survey shows that support for the secular state has grown stronger. In 1991, 21 percent of Turks polled said they supported Shariah (Islamic law), but that figure fell to 9 percent in 2006. Judging from the fuss over Gul’s wife’s headscarf – which will make her the first First Lady of modern Turkey to cover her hair – you would think that veiling was on the rise. In fact, the same survey shows the number of women appearing uncovered in public increased from 27 percent in 1999 to 37 percent in 2006.

  75. Sukran Says:


    I am aTurk.

    I have the right to sue you because you are insulting and spreading hate and resentment against the nation I belong with a chronology that includes a little truth, mostly lie, perverts the facts of the history, deviates the events, switches the reality, etc.

    So, I have FIVE questions for you, and something to say for those who are interested in truth and justice:

    QUESTION 1- If Armenians are RIGHT about their claim why DID NOT THEY FILE A CASE with international courts since they have been accusing Ottoman Empire for more than 40 years?

    QUESTION 2- Do not they HAVE ANY EVIDENCE, or do they have any EVIDENCE? In other words IF THEY HAVE factual and actual EVIDENCE why they apply extreme pressure on Turkish government to a FORCED CONFESSION?

    Crime of “genocide” is a really serious accusation for a government and its entire nation. If we are accusing a state, a government and its people by committing “genocide” which is an inhuman crime ‘premeditation’ is one of the absolutely necessary elements of this offense and has to be proved.

    Otherwise accusation becomes lie and turns to an inhuman slander.
    Those people were not targeted for their ethnicity or race. Those people’s ‘actions’ were targeted to ‘prevent’. Moreover the main intention of Ottoman Empire was to provide ‘protection’ of those people:

    The event took place at the time of World War I, one of the bloodiest war in the world history, by mid-1919, it had killed more humans than any other disease in a similar period, between 20 million to 40 million people died.

    Ottoman Empire was in the middle of WWI, was fighting in around tens of battles, and was occupied from East to Western border, from South to Northern border of its land.

    Armenian people were citizens of Ottoman Empire. (Armenians became even ministers and played important roles in the Ottoman government when Ottoman was Ottoman.) During the WWI, Armenians who were targeted of provocation for being against Ottoman Empire and destroyed numerous of Turkish villages in the Eastern Anatolia. They killed, burned, tortured, raped, murdered civilian Turkish residents -almost all of them were women, elder people, children, babies and other people who could not go for fight in the war- of those villages.

    When Turkish men returned to their villages before war ended for some reason -injured, being veterans, etc.- they were horrified by what happened to their wifes, mothers, children, fathers, other relatives.

    Ottoman Empire had to take action and tried its best, to ‘prevent’ Armenians’ unfortunate continuing actions and to ‘protect’ them from possible reaction of relatives of Turkish victims. Yes, it forced to Armenian citizens of Empire in Eastern Anatolia to immigrate and settle in another places, because it had to. There was no other alternative during the war for a state who had spent all its financial sources to defense itself in the wars for nearly two centuries.

    If Ottoman Empire’s intention was ‘genocide’, letting the relatives of victims of Armenian massacre to do anything they desired to do was a simple, basic, easy option without spending any governmental effort, time and money at that time.

    Would you like to discuss about “Law of War” and “Crimes of War”?

    Are we aware of the fact that the Turkish Nation has been facing with this resentment more than 40 year? All the Ottoman Empire did was to defend some of its people from some of its people’s coercion, tortious, illegal, inhuman, degrading, abusive, malicious acts during the war.

    Don’t you think those civilian defenseless Turkish and Kurdish people who were murdered, killed, raped, tortured, burned only because of their etnicity were victims of the ‘genocide’?

    I know, someone who is ‘expecting benefits’ from the false does not like truth since truth may not be as profitable as misrepresenting.

    QUESTION 3- What would you name murdering, killing, raping, burning, torturing, boiling, etc. those civilian defenseless Turkish/Kurdish women, children, babies, elder people, no doubt only because of their etnicity?

    I also would like to make you remember some fundamental principals of law that related to this issue which I am hoping can make easier to determine other’s intention. If we have any respect to law and justice besides our desires, let’s make a quick look the list below:

    1- “Alter ego defense”: Self defense and defense of others are a pair of legal theories under which otherwise tortious or illegal acts may be justified when committed for the purpose of protecting oneself, or for the purpose of protecting another person. This may include the use of violence or even deadly force.

    Defendants who use this defense are arguing that they should not be held liable for a crime, since the actions taken were intended to protect another individual from danger. This defense is treated in a manner similar to self defense, in that the use of violent force, used by the defendant, must be in some manner appropriate to the situation. Generally, the defendant must have a reasonable belief that the third party they are seeking to defend is in a position where that third party would have the right to defend themself.

    2- “Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali”, which means penal law cannot be enacted retroactively.

    3- “In dubio pro reo” which comes in as part of the ‘careful weighing’. It is not an evidence-rule but a principle pertaining to the decision-making. It comes into play after the weighing of evidence has taken place. If at that stage, the judge is not fully convinced of a fact that is relevant for the decision, he has to presume the fact that has the least impact on the accused.


    Of course, if we don’t have any concern about law, we don’t have to care about all this fundamental principles.

    We should check our level of respect to justice and law, before we accuse an entire nation with an inhuman crime, we better be sure we are not under the influence of our ill will or resentment. When there is a serious error has been trying to established for tens of years while carrying or bearing a grudge against somebody, it is really hard for us to see the ‘justice’ behind those clouds, I understand, but I cannot promise to continue to understand this stupid position for long naturally.

    QUESTION 4- Why DID NOT Ottoman Empire have to displace its Armenian citizens resided in other parts of the Anatolia, such as Istanbul, Izmir and other tens of cities? In other words why did Ottoman Empire HAVE TO DISPLACE only its Armenian citizens resided in the EASTERN REGION OF THE COUNTRY?

    QUESTION 5- How can we HELP THOSE who cannot deal with their own hate and harassment against Anatolia?

    FYI: I am from Smyrna by the way. Smyrna was burned by Greek troops while they were leaving Anatolia after they lost the war against Turkish troops.

  76. Sukran Says:

    Dear Eagle,

    Sorry for my long post with no relation to your article, if I tried to fix all the false statements in that chronology it would have been taken even longer, so I limited my words by asking a few questions…
    peace, may God bless you.

  77. Eagle Says:


    No worries, I am not a nit picker when it comes to comments all I ask is for people to respect one another. Shiva was booted from the blog because he couldn’t do that. His clear hate for anything Muslim was more than I wanted here. If he should come and answer your post I will allow it. But in the mean time, others can read it.

    Thanks again for taking the time, and as always, God Bless you and yours.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: