zzerous
-
Posts
45 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Partners
Immigration Wiki
Guides
Immigration Forms
Times
Gallery
Store
Blogs
Posts posted by zzerous
-
-
I have quick question. I see people talking about tracking their cases online. I have done that when I applied for 1-130 with the immigration but can you track the case with the NVC and embassy?. If yes, how?
-
All these years we were led to believe that the Palestinian struggle was all about
the return to the 1967 borders. And now we know it's a load of #######:
Israel (eCanadaNow) - Palestinian Foreign Affairs Minister Mahmoud al-Zahar said
today that Hamas is against peace with Israel, will not give up the right of return
of Palestinian refugees and will not recognize Israel even if a Palestinian state
is created in the pre-1967 borders.
Al-Zahar also threatened Israel with response to the artillery shelling by the IDF
at Beit Hanoun, where 19 Palestinians were killed due to machinery fault at one
of the artillery stations.
The FM also noted that Hamas will receive most seats in the Palestinian parliament,
thus changing PA’s policy to its liking. He also revealed that Hamas turned down
PA’s Prime Minister Mahmoud Abass’s offer to release kidnapped Israeli soldier
Gilad Shalit under Egyptian custody prior to Israel’s assurance of release up to
a thousand Palestinian prisoners.
your post is a load of #######....all those years did any one offer and execut on a palstinian state in the pre-1967 borders. it is simple history tells us no one can occupy and steal peoples land and their right to live on their own proprty.
-
So pathetic. So not cool....the Israelis are committing a holocaust on the Palestinians and the world is silently watching...and other post thing like this thinking its cool..what a shame.
-
Hi all,
Does anyone here have the recipe for Jordanian Mansef? Can you please share it. Thanks.
-
Believe me we all feel your guys' pain. It took almost a year from filiing to getting the visa for my husband.
I hated that embassy but really they are probably the best in that region.
Algeria seems to be the best to me in ME/NA. I guess if you were to look at ME only then yes Jordan would probebly be the best which doesn't say much for the other countries.
Excuse Meeeeee JP....... Amman is probably the best in the MIDDLE EAST
No argument there.
You are starting to sound like a real Jordanian. Amman is the best indeed....but I am so mad at the immigration process and the people who runs it...this whole system need to be scratched and replaced with more eduated, smart and motivated people...I have heard and gone thru issues that can only happen in a very backward system or a system that intentionally discrimate against a certain group...I guess both are true here...
-
I don't want to be the bearer or bad new but I think Amman is currently scheduling interviews for the second half of next year. I got my fiance visa approval from teh USCIS on April 6th and my interview was scheduled for February 27, 2007. They contacted us in September and moved it up to Oct 19th.
We are now in AP and not really sure how long its going to take. Amman is slow....very slow.
Good luck
What is AP?
Administrative Processing.
thanks but what does that mean? is it security checks? what do you think triggered it?
It's most likely security checks and a pretty standard thing for everyone to go through. Everyone has to go through some form of it but the length of time is different for everyone. They are basically processing his paperwork right.
You would think that those buffoons would do the right process from the get go and not put peoples lives and possibly hurt relationships because of their incompetence. This is one of the most backward and inhuman process I have ever heard of. It is too important and affects lives to be manged by jokers.
-
hi everyone,
I am also going to be filing through amman in the next 2 months. I've been through the process once before, but just wanted to say hello to everyone! I will be filing the k-1 for the second time, I'll keep you posted on my progress.
good luck!
this is why Amman is slow..i guess.
-
I don't want to be the bearer or bad new but I think Amman is currently scheduling interviews for the second half of next year. I got my fiance visa approval from teh USCIS on April 6th and my interview was scheduled for February 27, 2007. They contacted us in September and moved it up to Oct 19th.
We are now in AP and not really sure how long its going to take. Amman is slow....very slow.
Good luck
What is AP?
Administrative Processing.
thanks but what does that mean? is it security checks? what do you think triggered it?
-
I don't want to be the bearer or bad new but I think Amman is currently scheduling interviews for the second half of next year. I got my fiance visa approval from teh USCIS on April 6th and my interview was scheduled for February 27, 2007. They contacted us in September and moved it up to Oct 19th.
We are now in AP and not really sure how long its going to take. Amman is slow....very slow.
Good luck
What is AP?
-
I'm not talking about merely being sweet to him. My husband is always telling me about foreign women who send their SOs thousands of dollars and all kinds of pricey presents; PCs, Ipods, tvs, you name it. Is this common? Is it a good thing? Just curious. I don't do this and I think my husband is a little jealous of those who are being lavished with material goods.
I think your husband is greedy....realtionships are not built on gifts and giving lots of gifts do not measure love.
-
You are ignoring that there are 4 ( not 2) sources of Islamic law: Quaran, Sunnah, IJma and Ijtihad.
I have not ignored it, and in fact, dealth with it on the “Laws of Islam” thread and in a subsequent response on this thread.
Even though Quruan and Sunah “may" never have mentioned any thing about a Muslim woman marrying a Christian/ Jewish man the Ijma and Ijtihad of Muslim scholars agrees with prohibiting that. You can contact many of the Islamic centers who are responsible for Ijtihad and Fatwa via email or phone and check with them and make sure that you are doing what the right thing. I am sure there are many papers/research has been done in this area and someone can direct you to what the Islamic law says
The problem is, no scholar can make haram what Allah has not; that is why I mentioned the asl al deen. Besides, there is disagreement over what constitutes ijima; is it a consensus of the scholars (and which scholars?), and consensus involving the Companions, or a consensus of the ummah (what portion of the ummah?).
As a Muslim you should not use any disagreement to your own personal advantage. Allah asked us to avould " Shobahat". Ask Muslims, ypu pick ypir number, and find out whay portion is For/Aganist and this can give you and indication. Ask Muslim scholaresm, not just the 5 Islamic Scholars ( who I am really interested in knowing who they are and which university/ cenbter they work for) and find out what portion is FOR/Against.
I work for 5 Islamic scholars, classically trained with ijaz who can issue fatwas, and none of them believe this ruling to be binding on all or that it creates a haram act. For one thing, Ijtihad and fatwas are only binding on those who fall under the jurisdiction of those who issue them, or for those who choose to follow them.
I already married out, by the way.
That is not a reason why you should continue if you find out that is is Haram. That is why I asked you top find out and research it.
As might you know, in Arabic, every word in has a 3 letter verb that is is derived from, As far as the definition of mushrikeen or kuffar: mushrik is any one who accepts or believes that God has a "partner" in this whole creation and running of the world. Kafer is from the arabic work Kafer, i.e., covering something so not one can see it or denying the existence of something by deciding not to lok at it. Christianes and jews deny isalm as a religion and deny Allah as God. Hence the work Kuffar can be used on them. Kafer or Kuffar is not equivalent the English word infidel(s) it simply means the people who do not accept Islam.
There is only one God, and when Muslims deny that the God of the Christians and Jews is the same God as their own, they are doing the same thing they accuse the ahl al kitab of doing. Allah did not apply the words "musrikeen" or “kuffar’ to all ahl al kitab, and I will not do so either. He used "kuffur" to describe those who were hostile to Islam, not just those who did not call themselves Muslim. He has said that there will be Christians and Jews who will go to heaven and Muslism who will not, so, I follow no agenda that presupposes Muslims to be a Chosen People who will all go to heaven, for we have been warned against that and told firmly that Allah will judge between us all.
[b]Yes there is ONLY ONE GOD "ALLAH" and he says the only reliogion I accept is ISLAM. I have explained to you what these words mean. Isalm does not deny that Chruistian and Jew are AHL KETAB, they deny ISALM as areligion and Muhammed and a prophet and any one who does that can be called KAFER based on the defintion I provided above.[/b]
-
Thank you, Rebecca, for clearing this up. I'm not trying to judge szsz...as I said before, I don't care who marries who. [b[i'm just trying to prove a point that you can't go around judging ppl and saying they are doing haraam and what not and you're not practicing what you preach.[/b] I'm not a conservative Muslim myself. I sin just like everyone else. I don't like to be judged by other human beings who are not without sin themselves. It just really bugs me when ppl are so smug and self righteous as if their shitt don't stink. I would really prefer to keep religion off the forums. It causes too many problems and creates animosity and hard feelings.
Anyone who doesn't like being judged should avoid publicizing their sins.
As Rebecca said, there is no prohibition against marriage between a Muslima and an ahl al kitab man, so it is not a sin and there is no threat of eternal damnation or punishment originating from God. Not from the Quran, not from the Sunnah, thus not in the sharia, which means that it is not haram. So, I have not sinned in marrying a Christian man. I may have disappointed some mullahs who don't like the idea, but I doubt that Allah is upset.
When the sharia is silent about an issue, Islamic law requires application of the asl al deen, The halal is that which Allah has made lawful in His Book and haram is that which He has forbidden, and that concerning which He is silent He has permitted as a favour to you.* That has not been done in this case, and several of my friends and family who were studying the deen set out to find out the truth about this issue.
The anti-interfaith marriage cut and pastes will usually do one of three things as they lie about this issue:
1. They will post partial ayat, omitting the part that forbids men to do the same as the women are forbidden to do. For example, the ayah that moddy posted is addressed to both men and women, and it prohibits marriage with mushrikeen (idolaters), not ahl al kitab, so it is not a prohibition against marrying people of the Book, and it is not just for women. Another favorite ayah that gets the same treatment is 60:10, which is also addressed to men and women and disallows marriage with "kuffar", which is often mistranslated as "unbeliever", as is "Mushrikeen". Kafir is a specific type of unbeliever, and not a blanket term. It refers to those who are hostile to Islam, and forbids us from marriage with them. 60:10 was revealed during the Battle of Uhud, and history shows that there were Muslim men who lost wives to the command, most notably Umer.
2. They will say that the ahl al kitab come under the umbrella of mushrikeen and kuffur, and that 5:5 is an exception that abrogates the prohibitions in 2:221 and 60:10, but does so only for men. This is a particularly grievous and self-serving rationalization, for legitimate scholars take abrogating the Message, the Word of God that has existed and been perfected since Adan and Hawa, very, very seriously, and this is not an occasion upon which to do so.
3. They will justify the prohibition as a protection for women, in that the man is the head of the household and the women obeys him, so a Muslim woman cannot obey a non-Muslim man. This one makes me laugh. Again, history shows that among the Prophet's inner circle were Muslim woman/non-Muslim man couples for decades, including his own daughter, Zaynab, who was married to a non-Muslim for nearly 20 years after she converted. Ibn Abbas, a Companion, converted 20 years after his wife. Umer also converted after his wife. The Prophet never forced any Muslim to divorce, although after his son-in-law was captured in battle against the Muslims, he did ask him to separate from her until he converted. Who could blame him for that?
The fact is, Islam does not inherently condone patriarchy and male dominance, nor demand that men be the head of the household and that their wives obey them. The Quran reminds couples that they have mutual rights, given from God (4:1), and that they are to dwell together in love (7:189). Even the ayah from where the interpretation of man as "qawaam"(protector and maintainer) arises, 4:34, is conditional.
When one looks to the Sunnah for guidance, one finds that the Prophet, an unaffiliated tribal orphan since infancy, had three qawaam in adulthood, until he established his power. Ironically, one was a woman and the other two non-Muslim men. The woman was Khadija, his wife of 25 years. She was much older, wealthy on her own, and his employer. She also financed his prophethood. The other was his uncle Talib. When the two died in quick succession, he was left without a qawaam, and fled to Abysinnia, where the Christian king put he and the tiny Muslim community under his protection. The Prophet was not a qawaam himself until late in life.
So, are all ahl al kitab mushrikeen and kuffar? The Quran says that no Muslim can marry a mushrik or a kafir, so, since they are allowed in marriage, it is not a stretch to believe that the ahl al kitab, as a whole are not mushrikeen or kuffar, although there will be some among them, just as there are hypocrites among Muslims. Also, the Quran makes it clear that mushrik and kafir have a slim to none chance of entering heaven, so would he allow an exception for any Muslim to marry them? If one says no, there would be a sound basis upon which to do so, for even early scholars accepted them as People of the Book, aside from being blanket mushrikeen and kuffar, and that is how they are designated in the Quran. The Quran says in ayat 5:72 and 2:62 that there will be those among the ahl al kitab who will enter heaven, so it cannot be so that they are, as a group, either mushrik or ahl al kitab:
In regards to this issue, and the entire interfaith relations issue, the adversarial position has been given the highest profile. So it may surprise you to know that several times in the Quran, Allah tells us that diversity in belief is His intent and part of His plan as a test for humanity:
49.13 O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).
5.48 To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what God hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to the e. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If God had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to God; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute
10:99-100 If it had been your Lord's will, they would all have believed, all who are on earth! will you then compel mankind, against their will, to believe! No soul can believe, except by the will of God, and He will place doubt or obscurity on those who will not understand.
16. 93 If God so willed, He could make you all one people: But He leaves straying whom He pleases, and He guides whom He pleases: but ye shall certainly be called to account for all your actions.
I lived in peace and love with a beautiful Christian man to whom I was married religiously and legally for nearly 30 years and to whom I would still be married if not for his death all too soon. We were offered Allah’s test, took it, and, insha’allah, passed. There was no sin involved; our marriage was truly guided in His bidding and a blessing that I will thank Him for everyday.
But, being that there is a prohibition cited and enforced, what is the basis for it, if not the sharia? That is a complex issue that draws from fiqh perspectives of slavery law, politics and, even more heavily, from cultural attitudes toward women. There are sources other than the Quran and Sunnah that are utilized in the composition of fiqh rulings. Fiqh is the mortal attempt to deduce God’s Will from His Words. It is not perfect, not divine, nor immune from examination.
One is allowed to research the history, methodology and reasoning used to reach any determination in matters of mu`amalat, the law pertaining to social interactions. If you do the research and decide on the basis of what you have learned that the determination was not based on elements that would hold you binding to it, such as a command from God, you are free to reject it.
While researching the issue with trusted scholars, I saw that the evidence from the 11th century was based on patriarchal and cultural considerations that did not apply to the time and place in which I was operating. The elements of maslaha (public interest) maintained that women did not have the means to protect themselves, so they needed to be protected from influences that would cause them to stray from the faith. The elements of kafa’ah, the law of equality, deemed that a woman should marry a man who is her equal or better since she took on his status and to marry below her would lower her status. Marriage to a non-Muslim man, who is inherently inferior to a Muslim man, was forbidden in fiqh.
Also, under slavery law, upon which much of marriage law is based, the nikah (a contract for lawful sexual intercourse) required that all sexual aspects of a woman be exclusively for and controlled by her husband, so it was deemed that no non-Muslim man could legally enter into a contract that would give him control and exclusivity of a Muslim woman’s sexual parts and reproduction. Thus, with no ability to surmount the contractual aspect of the nikah, any consensual sexual contact with a non-Muslim man would be fornication and any progeny of the union would be bastards.
In this day and age, because of these rules, a Muslim woman in the Muslim world who marries even a man who is not from her country takes on his social status and is deemed his “property”. She and their children are considered to have taken on the nationality of the husband. In most cases, she loses some of her citizenship rights and the children cannot take on her nationality. This is a remnant of the patrilocal aspect of the tribal cultures that incubated Islam in Arabia.
All of this is far more about Jahilyya (pre-Islam) than about Islam, and not something to accept at face value. It would be interesting to see if anyone can find reasons from the Quran and Sunnah to justify this view of women and their relationships with men.
I will say this, when you don't know enough about Islam or Islamic law to be able to do more than cut and paste from internet sites without applying your own explanation, you impress no one who really has the goods.
So, moody, you still may find me to be self-righteous and smug, but my sh!t doesn’t stink regarding this, so, you have not proved your point at all.
*Reported in Al-Hakim, classified as sahih (sound).
Another thing that seems to go unnoticed is that the same jurists, the great imams, who decided to create a prohibition against interfaith marriage for Muslim women centuries ago, also created a prohibition against interfaith marriage for Muslim men in the west. Both are considered to be mukruh (undesireable), yet only one of the man-made prohibitions has been enforced to any extent; the other is generally ignored.
You are ignoring that there are 4 ( not 2) sources of Islamic law: Quaran, Sunnah, IJma and Ijtihad. Even though Quruan and Sunah “may" never have mentioned any thing about a Muslim woman marrying a Christian/ Jewish man the Ijma and Ijtihad of Muslim scholars agrees with prohibiting that. You can contact many of the Islamic centers who are responsible for Ijtihad and Fatwa via email or phone and check with them and make sure that you are doing what the right thing. I am sure there are many papers/research has been done in this area and someone can direct you to what the Islamic law says
As might you know, in Arabic, every word in has a 3 letter verb that is is derived from, As far as the definition of mushrikeen or kuffar: mushrik is any one who accepts or believes that God has a "partner" in this whole creation and running of the world. Kafer is from the arabic work Kafer, i.e., covering something so not one can see it or denying the existence of something by deciding not to lok at it. Christianes and jews deny isalm as a religion and deny Allah as God. Hence the work Kuffar can be used on them. Kafer or Kuffar is not equivalent the English word infidel(s) it simply means the people who do not accept Islam.
-
Anyway, even though I am not a catholic and I do not think the Pope is my spiritual leader, I still think he has a right to say whatever he wants to(within the law of course, which he was), without having to fear now for his life and to have his free speech robbed from him.
Many people in the west hide behind freedom of speech ...his (mine and yours) freedom of speech stops when we are offending others especially when you are offending a great religion with over 1 Billion followers. Do not we all live by that code?
And if this is his view then fine at least he should come out and say it explicitly, after all he was the one when he was a cardinal expressed his view on salvation and declared that salvation cannot happen outside the catholic church. He is also the one that opposed in intra religion prayers, i.e., Muslims, Christians and/or Jews praying together...because that means that we all pray to the same God and this means that the 3 religions are equal
His alleged apology says it all, he meant what he said and that is fine. But for many Muslims to get angry and reject his views and what he stands for is fine too.
again.. since he was quoting from what was written by a Byzantine Emperor, and was trying to show the differences of the then and now.... what is the real deal? Oh yeah.... the far left zealots want to be pissed at something/someone so they take offense to it.
Why not just come out and say "We want to be pissed at you for whatever reason... so we're just gonna be so 24/7" and ya know what? I'd be fine with that, because then that is an honest thing to say. But to make stuff up left and right just to be angry...??
Just a clarification…
He was quoting from that Book not to show the difference between the past and present.... According to the Vatican and many analysts he wanted to say this to open an " intellectual dialogue " between faiths!!!
So to stimulate the dialogue between Islam and Christianity he decided to start by saying your religion is evil and I will get deeply sorry and offended if this offends you!
And from his alleged apology it is clear that he meant to say what he said
-
Anyway, even though I am not a catholic and I do not think the Pope is my spiritual leader, I still think he has a right to say whatever he wants to(within the law of course, which he was), without having to fear now for his life and to have his free speech robbed from him.
Many people in the west hide behind freedom of speech ...his (mine and yours) freedom of speech stops when we are offending others especially when you are offending a great religion with over 1 Billion followers. Do not we all live by that code?
And if this is his view then fine at least he should come out and say it explicitly, after all he was the one when he was a cardinal expressed his view on salvation and declared that salvation cannot happen outside the catholic church. He is also the one that opposed in intra religion prayers, i.e., Muslims, Christians and/or Jews praying together...because that means that we all pray to the same God and this means that the 3 religions are equal
His alleged apology says it all, he meant what he said and that is fine. But for many Muslims to get angry and reject his views and what he stands for is fine too.
-
Thanks guys
But if he wants to apply for someone in the future and one of the questions ask if "you have filled out this application before" will he answer yes or no to that question.
YES
-
Unfortunately this man represents the church and he knows what and why he says what he say. He is not just a man. And I totally I agree that not all Catholics or Christians believe in what he says, the pressure is not on the western world or Christians is on their leaders who are desperately trying to poison the bridges between cultures and religion. The pope ignored history and acted as if he is innocent and people took his speech out of context.
He ignored the 500 years of crusade in the middle east when his church and by the name of God killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of Muslims and eastern christens and stole their land and wealth for over hundred years. the pope ignored when in the last century the over hundred years when the west occupied the Arab/ Muslim land and killed hundred of thousands, I never heard an apology or a comment for that.
He also ignored the Holocaust which happened in Europe and in his own country killing innocent people and again in the name of God and because they are different. Any by the way the Jew sought refuge with many Muslim Khalif's (leaders) when they ran away from the discrimination and the killing that was waged against them in Europe- go the National Museum of History in NY and read the testaments from many of the Jewish rabaies.
He claims that Islam forces itself by war, please let him or anyone else go back to history and count the number of wars between Muslims and others and tell me where it happened; in Europe or in the East? And who moved armies to fight whom.
The pope ignored the many years of killing his church initiated against the Eastern Church killing many thousands of their leaders unless they submit to the pope in Rome.
And if Muslims are so cruel and forceful, how come we still have many Christians living among us in the Arab World with their own churches and getting the full support from Muslim /Arab government. As a matter of fact we have an entire country (Lebanon) who by the constitution must have a Christian president.
And No we do not want the western world to be sensitive to our needs or around us or stop your celebrations. Your religion and celebrations do not offend us as matter of fact we Muslims believe equally in Muses, Jesus and Mohammed; they are all brothers and messenger of God. What offended us is what some the western leaders and recently church leaders lie about our religion and prophet. And what offend us more is when they play innocent and ignorant.
I urge you to read more and do your own research
The Crusades were a response to 300 years of Muslim invasions and oppression. The Near East, Middle East and North Africa, the cradle of Christianity, used to be Christian civilizations, till the Muslims wiped them out. They almost did the same in Europe.
You clearly do not know much about history....the places you mentioned were never the cradel of chirisianity... Muslims/Arabs lived in these places before Christainity existed even the pope does not agree with you on this one. and can you please give me the exact names of battles / wars/ occupation that muslims inflected for 300 years.....
Uh...sure...perhaps I don't know much about your revision of history
So, Christianity was born in western Europe after the 7th century? And the Muslims were living peacefully in the Middle East and Asia Minor in harmony with their non-Muslims neighbors, having been in those lands from time immemorial? And then a bunch of Christians in Europe decided to invade and conquer the peace-loving Muslims without the slightest provocation? The Muslims had never even heard of the concept of swords till the evil Christians came along??In actual fact, Christianity was born in Judea around 30A.D (six centuries before Islam), rapidly spread to Syria, Asia Minor and Egypt (the Near East), Greece, and Italy, and by the 3rd century (still four centuries before Islam) had spread at least throughout the Mediterranean world. Major Christian centers were in Jerusalem, Antioch (Syria), Ephesus (and several other cities in Asia Minor, now Turkey), Alexandria (Egypt) Corinth (Greece), Thessolonica (Macedonia), Rome (Italy), and Hippo (now in Algeria), all by the 4th century, and most by the early 2nd century. Christianity was spread without force, by verbal persuasion, at least till the time of Constantine. You might find the following map (#132), from the site Stina posted, helpful:
Regarding Muslim wars and conquests, here's a good place to start:
But you expect me and others to believe your version of History....look at your LINK that you provided and tell me where did Muslims fight Romans/Christians.....is it in Europe or in Syria? The Romans were in Palestine, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt even before Christ as occupiers of the land. And the same occupation still continues.
We fought their occupation to gain our land back....most of these fights were over Arab/Muslim land Muslims never wages an organized war against Europe to demolish Christianity. You provide a biased read of History and ignoring the basic idea behind the Crusades...the church were selling their followers papers to guarantee their entrance to heave if they kill the infields (Muslims).
Arabs the original owners of that Land never followed Christianity as a religion (as you said they were Pagan). Arabs are the descendants of Abraham and his son Ishmael lived there before the Romans and before Christ.
And for you to claim the Christianity was spread by mouth of word and to claim that
" Major Christian centers were in Jerusalem, Antioch (Syria), Ephesus (and several other cities in Asia Minor, now Turkey), Alexandria (Egypt) Corinth (Greece), Thessalonica (Macedonia), Rome (Italy), and Hippo (now in Algeria), all by the 4th century, and most by the early 2nd century." is just appalling. Most followers the Christ were either killed or ran away from the religion; the Romans were killing them on site. When prophet Mohammed came, there were few Arab Christians mainly in Syria and in Bethlehem in Palestine but the rest of the area were without a religion and were controlled forcefully by the Romans ( cannot you check the Roman ruins in the Middles east ( Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq etc). But you were right on the dot when you said “Christianity was spread without force, by verbal persuasion, at least till the time of Constantine” Till Constantine their Christianity till he came he spread Christianity by the Sword not because he was interested in Salvation but because of greed.
As for the Turks they had their strong army even before coming to Islam and they were in continues war with Muslims and attacking them at many fronts from the North, just like the Jankis Khan (Tatar) who came from Asia and destroyed the Muslim Khalif and took over Iraq, Syria, and was only defected by the Muslim Leader in Egypt. Most of the Turks and before them the Tatar accepted Islam over the years and they themselves led the battle with Mohamed Bin Qasim to take back Istanbul from Byzantine, Istanbul is the Capital of Turkey now, their own land not yours not the pope.
Muslims never chased The Turks or Tatar back to their land to revenge the many years of oppression, Just like what the Muslims did with the Crusades when they get defeated by Salah Eldeen….the Muslim leader who is admired by his adversary for what he did after he regained Jerusalem. Salah Eldeen allowed them to peacefully leave on their ships to where they cam from, he was able to kill them and do exactly what the crusaders did to Arabs/Muslims when they took Jerusalem from Muslims.
Anyway, the main point you were trying to prove is that Crusades were just retaliation against Muslims wages wars on Europe, which you have deviated from. By going to your LINK I do not see any “Muslim Conquest” waged against England, France, Italy..Europe Bethlehem in Palestine…The one that was against the Byzantines were wars in Syria which is an Arab Land, the one that was against the Persian Empire (Now IRAN) was South of Baghdad in IRAQ an Arab/ Muslim country. I never claimed that Muslims/Arabs never engaged in wars to defend them selves, Islam ask Muslims to fight to defend their land and sacrifices everything for it
If Islam was forceful and spread by the sward how come people who were forced to join Islam did not convert back once they have the freedom to choose? And who is now under attack: Muslims or Christians?
P.S. I hope to the people who read this to understand that I do not think or believe that Crusaders and Christianity are one and the same.
-
Unfortunately this man represents the church and he knows what and why he says what he say. He is not just a man. And I totally I agree that not all Catholics or Christians believe in what he says, the pressure is not on the western world or Christians is on their leaders who are desperately trying to poison the bridges between cultures and religion. The pope ignored history and acted as if he is innocent and people took his speech out of context.
He ignored the 500 years of crusade in the middle east when his church and by the name of God killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of Muslims and eastern christens and stole their land and wealth for over hundred years. the pope ignored when in the last century the over hundred years when the west occupied the Arab/ Muslim land and killed hundred of thousands, I never heard an apology or a comment for that.
He also ignored the Holocaust which happened in Europe and in his own country killing innocent people and again in the name of God and because they are different. Any by the way the Jew sought refuge with many Muslim Khalif's (leaders) when they ran away from the discrimination and the killing that was waged against them in Europe- go the National Museum of History in NY and read the testaments from many of the Jewish rabaies.
He claims that Islam forces itself by war, please let him or anyone else go back to history and count the number of wars between Muslims and others and tell me where it happened; in Europe or in the East? And who moved armies to fight whom.
The pope ignored the many years of killing his church initiated against the Eastern Church killing many thousands of their leaders unless they submit to the pope in Rome.
And if Muslims are so cruel and forceful, how come we still have many Christians living among us in the Arab World with their own churches and getting the full support from Muslim /Arab government. As a matter of fact we have an entire country (Lebanon) who by the constitution must have a Christian president.
And No we do not want the western world to be sensitive to our needs or around us or stop your celebrations. Your religion and celebrations do not offend us as matter of fact we Muslims believe equally in Muses, Jesus and Mohammed; they are all brothers and messenger of God. What offended us is what some the western leaders and recently church leaders lie about our religion and prophet. And what offend us more is when they play innocent and ignorant.
I urge you to read more and do your own research
The Crusades were a response to 300 years of Muslim invasions and oppression. The Near East, Middle East and North Africa, the cradle of Christianity, used to be Christian civilizations, till the Muslims wiped them out. They almost did the same in Europe.
You clearly do not know much about history....the places you mentioned were never the cradel of chirisianity... Muslims/Arabs lived in these places before Christainity existed even the pope does not agree with you on this one. and can you please give me the exact names of battles / wars/ occupation that muslims inflected for 300 years.....
Yes in those areas there were Christian settlements prior. And Christianity started in Israel and was spread by word of mouth and by preachers to surrounding Arab areas and further out. At that time there were no Muslims, and many Arabs believed in pagan religions. The New Testament has many books named after cities in that region that all had a early growth of Christianity. Islam as a named religion did not even exist until hundreds of years after Christianity was started. I'm not going to say every inch of that area was Christian, but there was no Islam back then either. I am not expert on the crusades, but I just wanted to point out a few things.
Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem in Palestine and there is no doubt about that....the Romans (before they became Christian) were occupying that region at that time (they were in (Palestine, Jordan, Syria etc)...after Christ his students left the religion running away for their lives and then after many years the Emperor of Rome (Constantine) converted to Christianity and took it to Rome where the Pope is now. Arabs the original owners of that Land never followed Christianity as a religion (as you said they were Pagan). Arabs are the descendants of Abraham and his son Ishmael lived there before the Romans and before Christ.
As for the crusades and the occupation of England, France and Itay to Muslim and Arab land in the 20th centurey for more than 80 years, I am sure you can google it and find out more about it, it is what it is.
-
That, or he could just not respond to anything else in the mail, forget about the whole thing, I guess. I think I saw somebody on here a while back with the same dilemma. I'm not 100% sure tho. I am pretty sure he's not getting a refund.
Sorry to hear that tho!
Unless for bro, it's a good thing.He wont get a refund. I recommend that he should let USCIS know. First, it will look good that he is responsible for what he is doing. Second, he will save USCIS and the hundereds of thousands of applicants the wasted time and resources working on his application.
-
Hey guys,
I'm a bit confused because I received another update on my case, this one dated 09/17/06 (Sunday). I was touched 9/14, 9/15 (also got a RFE mailed out to me), and another touch 9/17. Is it possible for them to work on Sundays (I really don't think so). I'm guessing maybe it has something to do with the RFE, maybe they mailed it out. WHat do you guys think?
Thanks
Immigration employess hardly work during the week, they are one of the worest govt agencies in America. Most likey they did the update on Friday and the update to the web site was a Batch Job that was Auto run over the weekend which trigered the emails to you on Sunday.
-
hello all
I hope you will help me on this. My brother is going through a breakup,but he has already applied for his wife(case not approved yet). He wants to know how to stop the process with INS. Any advise?
Mail them and ask them to withdraw the application on the grounds of divorce/sepration.
-
Unfortunately this man represents the church and he knows what and why he says what he say. He is not just a man. And I totally I agree that not all Catholics or Christians believe in what he says, the pressure is not on the western world or Christians is on their leaders who are desperately trying to poison the bridges between cultures and religion. The pope ignored history and acted as if he is innocent and people took his speech out of context.
He ignored the 500 years of crusade in the middle east when his church and by the name of God killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of Muslims and eastern christens and stole their land and wealth for over hundred years. the pope ignored when in the last century the over hundred years when the west occupied the Arab/ Muslim land and killed hundred of thousands, I never heard an apology or a comment for that.
He also ignored the Holocaust which happened in Europe and in his own country killing innocent people and again in the name of God and because they are different. Any by the way the Jew sought refuge with many Muslim Khalif's (leaders) when they ran away from the discrimination and the killing that was waged against them in Europe- go the National Museum of History in NY and read the testaments from many of the Jewish rabaies.
He claims that Islam forces itself by war, please let him or anyone else go back to history and count the number of wars between Muslims and others and tell me where it happened; in Europe or in the East? And who moved armies to fight whom.
The pope ignored the many years of killing his church initiated against the Eastern Church killing many thousands of their leaders unless they submit to the pope in Rome.
And if Muslims are so cruel and forceful, how come we still have many Christians living among us in the Arab World with their own churches and getting the full support from Muslim /Arab government. As a matter of fact we have an entire country (Lebanon) who by the constitution must have a Christian president.
And No we do not want the western world to be sensitive to our needs or around us or stop your celebrations. Your religion and celebrations do not offend us as matter of fact we Muslims believe equally in Muses, Jesus and Mohammed; they are all brothers and messenger of God. What offended us is what some the western leaders and recently church leaders lie about our religion and prophet. And what offend us more is when they play innocent and ignorant.
I urge you to read more and do your own research
The Crusades were a response to 300 years of Muslim invasions and oppression. The Near East, Middle East and North Africa, the cradle of Christianity, used to be Christian civilizations, till the Muslims wiped them out. They almost did the same in Europe.
You clearly do not know much about history....the places you mentioned were never the cradel of chirisianity... Muslims/Arabs lived in these places before Christainity existed even the pope does not agree with you on this one. and can you please give me the exact names of battles / wars/ occupation that muslims inflected for 300 years.....
-
The pope ignored history and acted as if he is innocent and people took his speech out of context.
They DID take his speech out of context.
And don't try the "Pope Lover" thing on me. I'm atheist, and couldn't care less what the Pope condones or doesn't.
He also ignored the Holocaust which happened in Europe and in his own country killing innocent people and again in the name of God and because they are different.What the hell does the holocaust have to do with God? Hitler wasn't exactly a Xian.
He claims that Islam forces itself by warNo....the book he was quoting, which was written in the 1340s, said that, not the Pope.
First of all I am not trying the Pope Lover on you or anyone. I could careless, but what did you want me to call him..he is the Pope is not it he.
Second, Hitler was one man (and was a religious man according to some accounts), the entire nation in Germany (and some other European nations) condoned to some level the holocaust. After all it happened at the hands of the Germen and other Europeans which are Christians
Third, as the pope he should not have quoted any book that does not represent his views. Any way he has the chance to come out of the closet and tell us what he thinks about Islam. He still even after his speech today did not share with us his views, except for what they posted on one of their websites claiming that the Vatican regards Muslims with "esteem”…. some PR BS.
-
"Where is the outrage..."
That old chestnut again eh?
Well, when the cartoons were published they were pissed because supposedly those cartoons hurt their religious sentiments.
When the pope says his thing, they're pissed again supposedly because his words also hurt their religious sentiments.
While I don't understand the overreaction to a bunch of cartoons and something an old man in a fruity robe says, I can understand the feelings. Fine.
Every time a terrorist blows up someone and something, we are told that they are misusing Islam and giving it a bad name. Why doesn't this hurt their religious sentiments? Someone is using their faith to blow sh!t up and kill children, making their religion look awfully bad in the process, and that doesn't warrant protests?
Did you ever stop and ask the same question of why the world does not stop and protest the killing of innocent Iraqis, Palestinians, Lebanese and Afghanis. Why the world (and you) did not protest the daily massacres in Palestine and the Qana massacre in Lebanon Why the world does not stop and ask why do we still allow and support occupation of other people land.
Stop and think about the hypocrisy we are living in, stop and think why we still support undemocratic regimes when it suits us and label people as we please.
We Muslims are concerned with radicals who use religion to justify their actions. And in many countries like Egypt and Algiers fought radicals before you even heard about them It is no where in our teaching that Killing of human lives is justified or acceptable. An who says we did not protest and we do not debate this but remember hatred produces more hatred and with what is going on today in the world it is becoming difficult by the minute especially when the representative of the catholic church decides to falsify truth and history and criticize Islam, Muslims and their belief. If the pope or you or the cartoonist want a debate then let us have it with the right scholars and why not it open and live. There are scholars who can and want to engage in this dialogue.
But a bunch of cartoons do?
Ok. Whatever.
Now for my hypothesis as to why things are the way they are. Most Muslims are scared of the fundamentalists in their midst. They dare not protest against something the fundamentalists support.
-
Unfortunately this man represents the church and he knows what and why he says what he say. He is not just a man. And I totally I agree that not all Catholics or Christians believe in what he says, the pressure is not on the western world or Christians is on their leaders who are desperately trying to poison the bridges between cultures and religion. The pope ignored history and acted as if he is innocent and people took his speech out of context.
He ignored the 500 years of crusade in the middle east when his church and by the name of God killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of Muslims and eastern christens and stole their land and wealth for over hundred years. the pope ignored when in the last century the over hundred years when the west occupied the Arab/ Muslim land and killed hundred of thousands, I never heard an apology or a comment for that.
He also ignored the Holocaust which happened in Europe and in his own country killing innocent people and again in the name of God and because they are different. Any by the way the Jew sought refuge with many Muslim Khalif's (leaders) when they ran away from the discrimination and the killing that was waged against them in Europe- go the National Museum of History in NY and read the testaments from many of the Jewish rabaies.
He claims that Islam forces itself by war, please let him or anyone else go back to history and count the number of wars between Muslims and others and tell me where it happened; in Europe or in the East? And who moved armies to fight whom.
The pope ignored the many years of killing his church initiated against the Eastern Church killing many thousands of their leaders unless they submit to the pope in Rome.
And if Muslims are so cruel and forceful, how come we still have many Christians living among us in the Arab World with their own churches and getting the full support from Muslim /Arab government. As a matter of fact we have an entire country (Lebanon) who by the constitution must have a Christian president.
And No we do not want the western world to be sensitive to our needs or around us or stop your celebrations. Your religion and celebrations do not offend us as matter of fact we Muslims believe equally in Muses, Jesus and Mohammed; they are all brothers and messenger of God. What offended us is what some the western leaders and recently church leaders lie about our religion and prophet. And what offend us more is when they play innocent and ignorant.
I urge you to read more and do your own research
Need help from the Jordanian MENA's
in Middle East and North Africa
Posted
I once rented a car in Irbid it cost me about 20Jd/ day. They might give you lower if you rent for long period. Plus taxis in Jordan are plenty and cheap of that helps.