Does the Quran promote peaceful values? (I claim it does not.)

[Smart_Guy]

But there are many Islam-majority places in the world where wife beating is allowed - in the name of Islam. In those places, the Quran is on their side. Is there some part of what I just said that you disagree with?

I live in Saudi Arabia where I don't think you can find any orthodox Islamic place in the world more strict.

Wife beating is not something to complain about here, similar to the rest of the world. I hear people here saying there is a fine of 50,000 Saudi Riyals against it. Gotta search about it!

 

[Henrique Aguiar]

It's interesting how "Muslims and Islam are so perfect" and, however they still prefer to live in Western countries. The overwhelming majority of Muslim countries are plagued by hunger, poverty and war. It's more than proven that Muslim laws code (Sharia) is a failure (no religious freedom, no women rights, etcetera).
As a matter of fact, the ultra-renowned sociologist, philosopher and political economist (considered as one of the three founding creators of Sociology) Max Weber, via his work "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism", has shown that religion directly influences the development of a people or nation. Starting from this idea, I dare to say that Islam is a major obstacle for the modernization of the Muslim countries.

 

[Scimitar]

It's interesting how "Muslims and Islam are so perfect"

Islam is perfect. Muslims are not. Many Muslims do not represent authentic Islam.

Now that is settled:

and, however they still prefer to live in Western countries.

Without Muslims, Europe would never have recovered from WW2. The Europeans NEEDED us to rebuild their countries, and gave Muslims citizenship.

Pakistani's, Indians, etc all went to Europe to help rebuild it.

Further, They started their own businesses to help the economy along.

And still going strong today. Muslims send money back home - its a tradition.

Now you are going to have a problem with that. Stop hating on Muslims dude.

Your daughter might marry one.

The overwhelming majority of Muslim countries are plagued by hunger, poverty and war.

That is not a Muslim of Islamic issue, but one that tthe very west has implemented by causing trade embargos on Muslim lands. Seriously, you are failing here QUITE BADLY AT TRYING TO POINT OUT THE FLAWS IN ISLAM.

It's more than proven that Muslim laws code (Sharia) is a failure (no religious freedom, no women rights, etcetera).
As a matter of fact, the ultra-renowned sociologist, philosopher and political economist (considered as one of the three founding creators of Sociology) Max Weber, via his work "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism", has shown that religion directly influences the development of a people or nation. Starting from this idea, I dare to say that Islam is a major obstacle for the modernization of the Muslim countries.

I'd say that you are wrong. And I say time will tell. And i say good day to you

Muslims by nature are not a material people. Muslims dont require fast cars or big houses, but are encouraged in islam to live a humble life.

far as my experience goes, true muslims live like that even in the west.

As for womens rights dude you dont know ****, admit it.

in Islam, women have more right over the men than the other way round.

Try harder next time, come with substance and not emtpy, stupid, illogical opinion.

Kapush

 

[Henrique Aguiar]

Islam is perfect. Muslims are not. Many Muslims do not represent authentic Islam.

Even though I should share your thought that there really is a huge difference between followers and pseudo-followers, I must admit that Islam is far from being a perfect religion. No. Islam definitely isn't perfect. Unlike religions such as Christianity or Buddhism, Islam is a religion with warlike values. Perhaps even bloodthirsty values. Some examples of the "Islamic peacefulness":

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"
Quran (5:33)

Lovely. Subtlety is the strong point of Islam, right?

"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
Quran (8:12)

I should tell you that Islam is filling my heart with love, right now.

"Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."
Quran (9:14)

Just more words of love...

"And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction."
Quran (17:16)

Cute.

"Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward"
Quran (4:95)

This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).

I dare you to mention something that Jesus or Buddha said that incite war and the violence. At least one quote.

Without Muslims, Europe would never have recovered from WW2. The Europeans NEEDED us to rebuild their countries, and gave Muslims citizenship.
Pakistani's, Indians, etc all went to Europe to help rebuild it.
Further, They started their own businesses to help the economy along.
And still going strong today. Muslims send money back home - its a tradition.

Yes, but I don't remember when I said the immigrants weren't important. They relatively have helped Europe. But do not overestimate yourself. If immigrants are so important, walls along the borders weren't being built. Many Muslims prefer to face the risk of being drowned in the Mediterranean Sea instead of living in their Muslim countries. This is a fact.

Now you are going to have a problem with that. Stop hating on Muslims dude.

Your daughter might marry one.

Although I see no problem in a interfaith marriage, the Islam says no to religious freedom even in the love (does this word exist in the Muslim vocabulary? I'm not sure)

"(...) Islamic scholars generally forbid Muslim women from marrying non-Muslim men. This prohibition serves to preserve the Islamic faith from dilution and expand it, within societies which are patriarchal but multi-faith. It effectively ensures that over many generations, providing that the society is patriarchal, Islam would naturally gain in adherents relative to other co-existing religions, through its ability to secure the adherence of all offspring from mixed marriages. In effect, all children of any mixed-marriages involving Muslims are guaranteed to be raised as Muslim (...)"
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfaith_marriage_in_Islam]

Love means nothing to Islam. Islam wants to know just about numbers.

That is not a Muslim of Islamic issue, but one that tthe very west has implemented by causing trade embargos on Muslim lands. Seriously, you are failing here QUITE BADLY AT TRYING TO POINT OUT THE FLAWS IN ISLAM.

I'd say that you are wrong. And I say time will tell. And i say good day to you

And you're failing to speak English. I recommend you to improve your English before posting anything. Firstly, I'm not saying it, but a largely known and respected sociologist, philosopher and political economist (considered as one of the three founding creators of Sociology). If Protestantism (especially Calvinism) greatly influenced the development of the West, Islam has greatly influenced the developmental delay of Muslim countries.

Muslims by nature are not a material people. Muslims dont require fast cars or big houses, but are encouraged in islam to live a humble life.

far as my experience goes, true muslims live like that even in the west.

If so, what prevents you from returning to your home country? Isn't your Muslim country humble enough for you?

 

[Henrique Aguiar]

As for womens rights dude you dont know ****, admit it.

in Islam, women have more right over the men than the other way round.

"(...) Sexual segregation which keeps wives, sisters and daughters from contact with stranger men, follows from the extreme concern for female purity and family honour. Social events are largely predicated on the separation of men and women; the mixing of non-kin men and women at parties or the like is extremely rare and limited to some of the modernist Western-educated families.[52] Women who are seen socializing with a man who is not a relative, can be harassed by the mutaween, even charged with committing adultery, fornication or prostitution (...)"
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia]

If a woman talks to a man who is not her relative, she would be categorized as a prostitute. A society dominated by sexism.

"(...) In 2008 Khamisa Mohammad Sawadi, a 75-year-old woman, was sentenced to 40 lashes and imprisonment for allowing a man to deliver bread to her directly in her home. Sawadi, a non-citizen, was deported (...)"
[Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia]

Sexism, bigotry and cowardice form a disgusting mixture, no?

"(...) Women must show the signed permission from a mahram (close male relative—husband, son or grandson) before she is free to travel, even inside Saudi Arabia.[91] (...)"
[Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia]

In the retrograde vision of Muslim pseudo-men, women should always be submissive and dependent. In their eyes, women are nothing more than mere objects.

"(...) Women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia, although it is often tolerated in rural areas.[23] Saudi Arabia has no written ban on women driving, but Saudi law requires citizens to use a locally issued license while in the country. Such licenses are not issued to women, thus making it effectively illegal for women to drive.[93] Furthermore, most Saudi scholars and religious authorities have declared women driving haram (forbidden).[94] Commonly given reasons for the prohibition on women driving include:[95][96]

Driving a car involves uncovering the face.
Driving a car may lead women to go out of the house more often.
Driving a car may lead women to have interaction with non-mahram males, for example at traffic accidents.
Women driving cars may lead to overcrowding the streets and many young men may be deprived of the opportunity to drive.
Driving would be the first step in an erosion of traditional values, such as gender segregation.

Women are generally discouraged from using public transport. It is technically forbidden, but unenforced, for women to take taxis or hire private drivers, as it results in khalwa (illegal mixing with a non-mahram man).[95] Women have limited access to bus and train services. Where it is allowed, they must use a separate entrance and sit in a back section reserved for women.[81] But the bus companies with the widest coverage in Riyadh and Jeddah do not allow women at all.[97] (...)"
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia]

Women may not go out of the house, women may not drive, women are discouraged from using public transport. I wonder if there is something worse than being a woman who lives in a Muslim country. A huge humiliation.

"(...) As there is no penal code in Saudi Arabia, there is no written law which specifically criminalizes rape or prescribes its punishment. The rape victim is often punished as well, if she had first entered the rapist's company in violation of purdah. There is no prohibition against spousal or statutory rape (...)"
[Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia]

Disgusting. Just disgusting.

"(...) In the Qatif girl rape case, an 18-year old victim of kidnapping and gang rape was sentenced by a Saudi court to six months in prison and 200 lashes. The judge ruled she violated laws on segregation of the sexes, as she was in an unrelated man's car at the time of the attack. She was also punished for trying to influence the court through the media.[133] The Ministry of Justice defended the sentence, saying she committed adultery and "provoked the attack" because she was "indecently dressed".[134] Her attackers were found guilty of kidnapping and were sentenced for prison terms ranging from two to ten years.[135] According to Human Rights Watch, one of the rapists filmed the assault with his mobile phone but the judges refused to allow it as evidence.[136][137] The victim told ABC News that her brother tried to kill her after the attack.[138] The case attracted international attention. The United Nations criticized social attitudes and the system of male guardianship, which deter women from reporting crimes. The UN report argued that women are prevented from escaping abusive environments because of their lack of legal and economic independence. They are further oppressed, according to the UN, by practices surrounding divorce and child custody, the absence of a law criminalizing violence against women, and inconsistencies in the application of laws and procedures.[139] The case prompted American Muslim journalist Mona Eltahawy to comment "What kind of God would punish a woman for rape? That is a question that Muslims must ask of Saudi Arabia because unless we challenge the determinedly anti-women teachings of Islam in Saudi Arabia, that kingdom will always get a free pass."[137] In December 2007, King Abdullah pardoned the victim, but did not agree that the judge had erred (...)"
[Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia]

And you still have the audacity to claim that women have rights in Muslim countries. When you say it, you look ridiculous. Man, are you even reading the ******** you are posting here? Whereas Jesus did not allow a prostitute (Mary Magdalene) to be stoned, your dear prophet clearly approved this kind of insane and barbaric act against women.

Try harder next time, come with substance and not emtpy, stupid, illogical opinion.

Kapush

You are the one with empty, stupid and illogical opinions here. You are funny, aren't you?

 

[Smart_Guy]

It is easy to cherry pick without looking at the bigger picture and without fully understanding things as a whole where things complement each other, for the pure purpose of vandalism and bashing what one hates!

It is also easy to follow the media blindly believing every thing they say as long as we like it!

Expressing hatred, anger, spite and grudge is not a good thing and we should hold them back!

 

[TashaN]

TashaN, I don't know why in the world, you'd say that. I don't know where you live, but I'm inferring that where you live, wife beating would be a criminal offense, that's the same where I live. So, hooray, you and I are fortunate to live in such places.

But there are many Islam-majority places in the world where wife beating is allowed - in the name of Islam. In those places, the Quran is on their side. Is there some part of what I just said that you disagree with?

You will have to prove two things. First that there is in fact exist a country which use Islamic laws in their courts, then you have to prove that they ruled that wife beating was legal. Can you do that? If you can't then you will have to drop this claim altogether for being baseless.

Back to an earlier point - equality for women. Here's the entire verse from cocolia42's recommended translation:

So just in terms of women's equality, isn't the beginning of this verse abundantly clear? What possible historical context could change the meaning of the first sentence?

If a person believes that the Quran is the perfect word of God, how can he read this verse and feel that women are equal to men?

What's the issue in the verse? It's in favor for women. It says men are obliged to provide for women.

 

[TashaN]

I live in Saudi Arabia where I don't think you can find any orthodox Islamic place in the world more strict.

Wife beating is not something to complain about here, similar to the rest of the world. I hear people here saying there is a fine of 50,000 Saudi Riyals against it. Gotta search about it!

There you go. This is for icehorse as well. Although these two considered to be the most strict amongst Muslim countries in term of implementing Shariah, but you will still find the following.

Saudi Arabia:

this past September a court in eastern Saudi Arabia sentenced a “man” to 20 lashes for beating his wife.

Saudi Arabia Maintains Sentence of 20 Lashes To MAN For Beating Wife : Political Blind Spot

Under the law, men who beat their wives will be fined SR50,000 and face prison terms of between one month and a year.

SR50,000 fine for Saudis who beat wives - Emirates 24/7


United Arab Emirates:

She said that she filed two cases against her husband and he was sentenced to one year in jail, a Dh5,000 fine for beating and abusing her and a month in jail and a Dh1,000 fine in another case.

Her husband is still at large. An arrest warrant has been issued against him as well as a travel ban. He has been living in the country illegally since December 2012 because his employer failed to renew his visa because of the cases against him.

Wife's beatings nightmare brought to an end | GulfNews.com

 

[TashaN]

So what do you say now, icehorse? i'm waiting for your response to see how you are going to ignore or pass on this one.

 

[Scimitar]

If a woman talks to a man who is not her relative, she would be categorized as a prostitute. A society dominated by sexism.

This has absolutely no grounding in Islam and is a Pakistani cultural bias which has infiltrated their understanding of Islam.

So you'd be wrong.

You cannot judge a religion by a tradition belonging to a nation. That is stupidity in itself.

Sexism, bigotry and cowardice form a disgusting mixture, no?

I agree, but this does not apply to Islam at all. It applies to people who don't read the book to understand it, but to promote their own warped ideas.

Allah tells us in the Quran:

He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelations - they are the substance of the Book - and others (which are) allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed. - Quran - chapter 3 ayah 7

So you're wrong again.

In the retrograde vision of Muslim pseudo-men, women should always be submissive and dependent. In their eyes, women are nothing more than mere objects.

Rubbish. Women are our Queens, our precious pearls and diamonds, whom we protect and cherish beyond the mere understanding of westerners who don't mind their daughters getting pregnant by randomers who will not be a part of their lives once the child is born.

if anything bud, its westerners who have objectified the woman. Islam gives them status.

Westerners dont mind dating a girl who actually dresses like a prostitute, because that is the done thing in the west. And why? because it spells out "easy lay".

And you don't even have to pay, a few drinks and a meal and your set to bang her all night.... who is the prostitute now?

Once again, your warped ideas are overturned. All you bring is opinion, and I over turn that with actual observable evidence, I live in the west - I see it all the time.

Women may not go out of the house, women may not drive, women are discouraged from using public transport. I wonder if there is something worse than being a woman who lives in a Muslim country. A huge humiliation.

Women can go out of the house. They can drive, They can do whatever they like within a safe and secure society... but in a society where there are increased risks of rape and worse, it is advised that they seek mahram for their own safety... a male family member is a mahram.

Disgusting. Just disgusting.

Then take a bath.

And you still have the audacity to claim that women have rights in Muslim countries. When you say it, you look ridiculous.

I said women have rights in Islam - and Muslims have not had a spiritual guide/leader akin to a pope figure since 1924, when the Sauds were placed into power in Arabia by the British.

When we eventually do have our Khaliph, things will change rapidly... and you will be witness to that if you are still alive.

The truth is, i'm no fan of the Saudi regime, because they have made haraam (unlawful) things which were never meant to be lawful, such as women driving a car - I agree, that is a ridiculous law and it has absolutely no grounding in Islam.

Women can ride horses in Islam, so why cant they drive cars? The sauds have compromised Islamic understanding and the Wahhabi machine is the force that makes it happen.

Man, are you even reading the ******** you are posting here? Whereas Jesus did not allow a prostitute (Mary Magdalene) to be stoned, your dear prophet clearly approved this kind of insane and barbaric act against women.

he did not approve, he told her to go away and come back after the child had been born and lived past the age of breast feeding, and if she still felt like she needed to be forgiven - then to come back. She came back. The prophet was not pleased.

She insisted on the stoning.

And the people started to curse her, but you know what happened next? Clearly you do not, because if you did - you'd not have even tried to make your idiotic point

This is what happened next.

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) told the people to stop and then informed them that if her blood was to spread among the streets of their city, the people of that city would all be forgiven of their sins.

Note: If the guilty party who is being stoned in the pit - climbs out of their own accord, the stoning is to stop, and the punishment will be met in the afterlife.

The idea behind the stoning in this world is that if the person dies of it - they are not answerable for that sin to God anymore.

You are the one with empty, stupid and illogical opinions here. You are funny, aren't you?

I don't bring you opinion. I bring you the correct ideas and concepts within Islam to correct YOUR empty, stupid and illogical opinions here, you media-hype-monkey.



heh now chew hard on that... coz the swallowing part is gonna hurt.

 

[work in progress]

It's interesting how "Muslims and Islam are so perfect" and, however they still prefer to live in Western countries. The overwhelming majority of Muslim countries are plagued by hunger, poverty and war.

Are they plagued by hunger, poverty and war because these things are a natural result of their religion and did not exist prior to Islam? and every Muslim-majority nation is similarly plagued? Or, are you forgetting to factor in the effects and after-effects of European Colonization? If I'm not mistaken, the bulk of your Muslim immigrants in France are from former French colonies.

And colonialism never ended, when we consider the modern America-led system of colonization by proxy: oil companies and other corporate and banking interests who are backed by U.S. military force.

From the little reading I've done of the Middle East and Islamic nations, it appears to be that the kind of Islamism or Islamofascism that you and others complain about, is a relatively recent phenomena that didn't exist more than a hundred years ago. Could that be considered a reaction against western influence and colonization? If so, it's an attempt to shift the blame from outside interests who were seeking to control the resources of Muslim nations.

As a side note, I'd like to know how many immigrants have been created by the Iraq Invasion and neverending war that resulted?

 

[Scimitar]

well said ^

 

[icehorse]

TashaN:

You will have to prove two things. First that there is in fact exist a country which use Islamic laws in their courts, then you have to prove that they ruled that wife beating was legal. Can you do that? If you can't then you will have to drop this claim altogether for being baseless.

First off, your requirements for proof don't match my claims, but I think we're close enough...

Again, I forget the rules for providing links, can anyone explain simply how to provide links that are within the rules of this website?

TashaN, I was easily able to find out that 35 countries use Sharia to some extent in their legal system. I was also able to find out that (from the Wikipedia article on Sharia):

In deference to Surah 4:34, many nations with Shari'a law have refused to consider or prosecute cases of domestic abuse.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#cite_note-162http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#cite_note-163http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#cite_note-164http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#cite_note-165 Shari'a has been criticized for ignoring women's right in domestic abuse cases.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#cite_note-166http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#cite_note-167http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#cite_note-168http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#cite_note-169 Musawah/CEDAW, KAFA and other organizations have proposed ways to modify Shari'a-inspired laws to improve women's rights in Islamic nations, including women's rights in domestic abuse cases.

work_in_progress: You bring up historical context that I'm not sure I agree with, and that perhaps you ought to start in another thread? (I'd respond if you do.)

But briefly, Islamic history is rife with sectarian violence, it's own imperialism, misogyny, homophobia, anti-semitism, intolerance and so on, going back 1400 years. And if you want to look at more recent history, shouldn't you also look at instances where roles were reversed, such as Turkey, Syria, Kosovo and East Timor? Again - this is a big topic, a separate thread perhaps?

 

[Scimitar]

TashaN:

First off, your requirements for proof don't match my claims, but I think we're close enough...

Again, I forget the rules for providing links, can anyone explain simply how to provide links that are within the rules of this website?

TashaN, I was easily able to find out that 35 countries use Sharia to some extent in their legal system. I was also able to find out that (from the Wikipedia article on Sharia):

Actually only 13 countries apply sharia law in full. The rest only partly, in matters of births marriages and divorce.

Why is this an issue? They are developed or developing countries. The system works. Problem?

work_in_progress: You bring up historical context that I'm not sure I agree with, and that perhaps you ought to start in another thread? (I'd respond if you do.)

Rubbish, there is no need for another thread, his post was on topic and you just want to deny him the opportunity to refute you in this one. So damn obvious.

But briefly, Islamic history is rife with sectarian violence, it's own imperialism, misogyny, homophobia, anti-semitism, intolerance and so on, going back 1400 years. And if you want to look at more recent history, shouldn't you also look at instances where roles were reversed, such as Turkey, Syria, Kosovo and East Timor? Again - this is a big topic, a separate thread perhaps?

As if any other religion did not suffer the same you seriously very VERY biased and cannot use your faculty of reason. Such a shame. I was thinking a better discussion could be had from you, but when I have to point out flaws in your logic as I have just done, I wonder if any actual discussion can take place...

Good day to you

 

[icehorse]

Actually only 13 countries apply sharia law in full. The rest only partly, in matters of births marriages and divorce.

Why is this an issue? They are developed or developing countries. The system works. Problem?

Scimitar, I don't think you've been reading the entire thread - I mentioned this in order to respond to TashaN.

Rubbish, there is no need for another thread, his post was on topic and you just want to deny him the opportunity to refute you in this one. So damn obvious.

Scimitar, I'm more than happy to bring historical context into this thread. My hunch was that it was a distraction from the main discussion. But that's not me backing away by any means. In fact I made a brief summary of some refutation to his historical claims. You are welcome to start debating my response to his historical claims right now, and please do.

As if any other religion did not suffer the same you seriously very VERY biased and cannot use your faculty of reason. Such a shame. I was thinking a better discussion could be had from you, but when I have to point out flaws in your logic as I have just done, I wonder if any actual discussion can take place...

Scimitar, As I have said several times already, other religions ALSO have serious blood on their hands. I challenge you to ever find a post of mine that said otherwise. But bringing other religions into this thread, turns it in to a different discussion.

Good day to you

I suggest you re-read (or perhaps read for the first time), this thread.

 

[Scimitar]

I've read thru some of this thread, from the start, and in other random places - and I must say, all your points of contention for your opening post, have been reconciled - but you are not willing to admit it.

I see you as someone who is not willing to accept that he has had his question answered by Muslims. And those answers were good.

Why are you so bent on discussion when the points you raised have been settled upteenth times in this thread alone - and NO - a thread such as this does not warrant 20 pages of replies to one posts questions.

Once those questions are answered, do you really have the nerve to ask more questions within this thread and then claim that anyone who answers your new questions start another thread?

I can see right thru that.

 

[icehorse]

Scimitar,

You ought to improve your reading and critical thinking skills.

(And, BTW, I notice that you ducked responding to the historical branch of this thread that you so vigorously promoted.)

Please, feel free to move on.

 

[Scimitar]

Your telling that to an ex editor of a B2B publications, nice try bud. Don't embarrass yourself further.
As for critical thinking, I studied aristotle, and logic - you are on your one leg hopping desperately here.

As for the historical part of your thread, if I got onto that - you'd only tell me to start another thread... and I don't waste good precious posts on blind eyes and deafened ears.

Scimitar

 

[Scimitar]

Time for bed, Goodnight.

 

[icehorse]

Scimitar,

I don't imagine you'll go away, which means that you'll get the last word, good for you.

I'd say that the laziness and lack of evidence you've displayed in your posts on this thread so far, speak for themselves.