Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says

[MUQ]

-

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

CIA Lies About Lies
The Iraq War and the Persistent Myth of ‘Intelligence Failure’

By Jeremy R. Hammond (Contd.)



Additionally, there was no evidence for “related procurement efforts” that would be also required to produce centrifuges, and if the tubes were intended for this purpose, it would be “a centrifuge design quite different from any Iraq is known to have.” The DOE report stated,“[W]e assess that the procurement activity more likely supports a different application, such as conventional ordnance production. For example, the tube specifications and quantity appear to be generally consistent with their use as launch tubes for man-held anti-armor rockets or as tactical rocket casings.” Additionally, the lax manner in which Iraq had handled its procurement of the tubes “seems to better match our expectations for a conventional Iraqi military buy than a major purchase for a clandestine weapons-of-mass destruction program.” After further research, the DOE issued another report on May 9 noting that “Iraq has purchased similar aluminum tubes previously to manufacture chambers (tubes) for a multiple rocket launcher.”

The CIA responded with a report on June 14 acknowledging the error of its initial assessment. It admitted that the tubes “could be used as rocket bodies for multiple rocket launchers”, but nevertheless clung to its false claim that their specifications “are suitable for uranium enrichment gas centrifuge rotors” and that a conventional use was “less likely”. Once again, no rationale was offered for its differing assessment from the nation’s top experts on centrifuges at the DOE. The CIA issued another report on July 2 falsely claiming that they “are constructed from high strength aluminum (7075-T6) and are manufactured to the tight tolerances necessary for gas centrifuges. The dimensions of the tubes match those of a publicly available gas centrifuge design from the 1950s, known as the Zippe centrifuge.” It falsely stated that “the specifications for the tubes far exceed any known conventional weapons application, including rocket motor casings for 81-mm multiple rocket launchers.”

The IAEA first became alerted to the tubes issue in the summer of 2001, and immediately recognized that Iraq had previously used tubes with identical dimensions in a conventional rocket program, for which there was extensive documentation. A CIA analyst from the Center for Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation, and Arms Control (WINPAC) identified simply as “Joe”, was largely responsible for creating and propagating the argument that the tubes were intended for a centrifuge program. He travelled to Vienna in July to try to convince the IAEA experts of his position, arguing that after cutting the tubes and machining down the thickness, they could be used in a centrifuge that would then have the same mass as rotors in a Zippe centrifuge design (named after Soviet scientist Gernot Zippe). The IAEA experts pointed out to him that there were numerous flaws in his analysis, such as the fact that he had failed to calculate the mass of end caps and other components of such a design.

[MUQ]

As the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessment on Iraq would later observe, nine additional intelligence reports were produced over the next year discussing the aluminum tubes, but “[n]one of these assessments provided any additional information to support the CIA’s analysis”. The Senate Committee’s report offered useful insight into how the CIA was controlling the flow of information on the tubes, revealing how “Most of the assessments were disseminated in limited channels, only to high-level policymakers and were not available to intelligence analysts from other agencies.”

When asked by the Committee why this was so, CIA officials replied that they were written as responses to specific questions and intended for the President. Apparently relying on the CIA’s false claim that the tubes were a “match” to the Zippe design and being out of the loop about the DOE’s contrary assessment, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) produced a report on August 2, 2001 embracing the CIA’s case with the comment that “DIA analysts found the CIA WINPAC presentation to be very compelling.”

[The Advocate]

MUQ wrote:

<quoted text>
How did you say that women in Islam do not have any rights?
In fact Islam was the first religion which talked of rights for women!!
Islam also talked about rights for Slaves, which no one in those days "could even think".
In Quran it is recorded that"
"And they (i.e. women) have rights over men as they men have rights over them, but men one degree more, and Allah is all Powerful Wise".
IT was very wrong to say that women in Islam have no rights.
But Islam does not prescribe to the irrational and unreasonable modern philosophy that men and women are created as "direct competitors" with each other in all matters.

Wait...what "modern philosophy?"

[fadu singh]

MUQ wrote:

<quoted text>
Ans.
01. I did not put blame on ALL Hindus. I know majority of Hindus are peaceloving and they have no grudge against Muslims or Islam.
What I said was about the way Indian Govt. functions and how they have systematically and with intention and planning brought down Muslims to this condition in 60 years.
And there was no demand from any Hindu circles as for as I know to show protest or displeasure at what was happening. They were a moot spectator of what was happening.
I do not want Muslims to be generalized the same way I do not want Hindus to be generalized. In these discussions when we name Hindus and Muslims it is for those who are responsible for the state of affairs, not all Hindus nor All Muslims.
02. My Dear Sir, there IS provision in laws to take care of Fanatic organizations! But it take guts to implement it on Hindu Extremist Organizations. The law is only used against Muslim organizations!!
03. What is constitution? It is only a scrap of paper. You can prepare Best Constitution in the world, but what is its use if it is not put into practice.
Indian constitution is no doubt best in the world, but it is not implemented in spirit what it says in letters.
04. Who says that there were not atrocities against Non Muslims in India during Mughul or any other period? But does that qualify to paint the entire period with Black Color?
When some one rules such a big country like India with such a small force as Muslims and British did, there is bound to be some harsh decisions, some miscarriage of justice and even some cruelty.
No one should defend such acts, but to use these cases to malign the entire period and then mount an attack on Islam is not what I would call a reasonable approach.

Agreed!Muslims should have got the help from peace loving majority.
I don't condone oppression of Muslims in anyway.I think my comments give a negative connotation that I do.
But one thing I don't agree with you.The presence of Hindu fanatics in politics isn't the right reason for the Muslims' reluctance to participate in politics.
The only possible solution to their problem is their participation in politics.If they really want an end to their problems,they have to come forward rather than being just whiny.

[w wman uk]

fadu singh wrote:

<quoted text>
Agreed!Muslims should have got the help from peace loving majority.
I don't condone oppression of Muslims in anyway.I think my comments give a negative connotation that I do.
But one thing I don't agree with you.The presence of Hindu fanatics in politics isn't the right reason for the Muslims' reluctance to participate in politics.
The only possible solution to their problem is their participation in politics.If they really want an end to their problems,they have to come forward rather than being just whiny.

They have to grow up chamge in fact we all have to. The murhumna are the religion of great offence. Why insnt the hindu prison population rising like the faithfull muslim one. l notice their faithfull because we pay for imans to attend to their spiritual needs and translators .

[w wman uk]

MUQ wrote:

<quoted text>
Ans.
01. I did not put blame on ALL Hindus. I know majority of Hindus are peaceloving and they have no grudge against Muslims or Islam.
What I said was about the way Indian Govt. functions and how they have systematically and with intention and planning brought down Muslims to this condition in 60 years.
And there was no demand from any Hindu circles as for as I know to show protest or displeasure at what was happening. They were a moot spectator of what was happening.
I do not want Muslims to be generalized the same way I do not want Hindus to be generalized. In these discussions when we name Hindus and Muslims it is for those who are responsible for the state of affairs, not all Hindus nor All Muslims.
02. My Dear Sir, there IS provision in laws to take care of Fanatic organizations! But it take guts to implement it on Hindu Extremist Organizations. The law is only used against Muslim organizations!!
03. What is constitution? It is only a scrap of paper. You can prepare Best Constitution in the world, but what is its use if it is not put into practice.
Indian constitution is no doubt best in the world, but it is not implemented in spirit what it says in letters.
04. Who says that there were not atrocities against Non Muslims in India during Mughul or any other period? But does that qualify to paint the entire period with Black Color?
When some one rules such a big country like India with such a small force as Muslims and British did, there is bound to be some harsh decisions, some miscarriage of justice and even some cruelty.
No one should defend such acts, but to use these cases to malign the entire period and then mount an attack on Islam is not what I would call a reasonable approach.

So muq is has taken time off from hating Jews to dispising Hindus. Forgeting the atrocities that the follers of islam perpetrate every day in India, how touching.

[ocxz]

w wman uk wrote:

<quoted text> So muq is has taken time off from hating Jews to dispising Hindus. Forgeting the atrocities that the follers of islam perpetrate every day in India, how touching.

I see you have NOT taken any time off from hating muslims and dispising followers of Islam.
The only atrocity here is your tiring exagerated unfounded accusative and totally off-topic useless rants.

[w wman uk]

ocxz wrote:

<quoted text>
I see you have NOT taken any time off from hating muslims and dispising followers of Islam.
The only atrocity here is your tiring exagerated unfounded accusative and totally off-topic useless rants.

No we wont were watching the religion of great offence very carefully. You really dont get it do you prissy. Why not move to murhumna land see how life is there, then you can speak with authority. Instead of being a plastic muslim.

[w wman uk]

armed whitey wrote:

Egypt shows Koran burning, Innocence of Muslims in Cairo court, sentences Terry Jones to death
In an article from SARAH EL DEEB, AP Cairo, and Curt Anderson, AP Miami today (excerpts):
"An Egyptian court convicted in absentia Wednesday seven Egyptian Coptic Christians and a Florida-based American pastor, sentencing them to death on charges linked to an anti-Islam film that had sparked riots in parts of the Muslim world....
"Florida-based Terry Jones, another of those sentenced, is the pastor of Dove World Outreach, a church of less than 50 members in Gainesville, Fla., not far from the University of Florida. He has said he was contacted by the filmmaker to promote the film, as well as Morris Sadek, a conservative Coptic Christian in the U.S. who posted the video clips on his website, were also among those charged."
"In a telephone interview Wednesday, Jones said the ruling "shows the true face of Islam" — one that he views as intolerant of dissent and opposed to basic freedoms of speech and religion."
"We can speak out here in America," Jones said. "That freedom means that we criticize government leadership, religion even at times. Islam is not a religion that tolerates any type of criticism."....
The official news report said that during the trial, the court reviewed a video of some defendants calling for an independent Coptic state in Egypt, and another of Jones burning the Quran, Islam's holy book. The prosecutor asked for the maximum sentence, accusing those charged of seeking to divide Egypt and incite sedition. All of the defendants, except Jones, hold Egyptian nationality, the agency added.
Some Christians and human rights groups worry that prosecutions for insulting religion, which existed to a degree under the secular-leaning regime of Hosni Mubarak, will now increase with the ascent of Islamists to power."
FULL ARTICLE HERE ON ABC.COM
standupamericanow.org

Nobody needs to hate islam it has ample hatred to go round the world. That film was a peice of rubbish just like the jery springer crap, we ignored it and used the off button on the tv but the murhumna responce was well so islamic.

[zorrainla]

The term "Palestine" is believed to be derived from the Philistines, an Aegean people who, in the 12th Century BC, settled along the Mediterranean coastal plain of what is now Israel and the Gaza Strip. In the second century AD, after crushing the last Jewish revolt, the Romans first applied the name Palaestina to Judea (the southern portion of what is now called the West Bank) in an attempt to minimize Jewish identification with the land of Israel. The Arabic word Filastin is derived from Latin. There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc.

Only one group of people have continuously lived in Israel for the past 3,700 years - the Jews. Jerusalem, in particular, has had a Jewish majority since the 1840s, 40 years prior to the beginnings of Zionism. Seventy-five percent of the land in east Jerusalem, which the press calls "historically Arab east Jerusalem," has been owned by Jews since 1947. The nations that inhabited the land prior to the Jews are no longer in existence, for they have been absorbed into various other peoples throughout the millennia. The Arabs of Israel only came to the land in 632 with the Muslim invasion.

The boundaries of most Middle East countries were arbitrarily fixed by the Western powers after Turkey was defeated in World War I and the French and British mandates were set up. The areas allotted to Israel under the UN Partition Plan had all been under the control of the Ottomans, who had ruled Palestine from 1517 until 1917. When Turkey was defeated in World War I, the French took over the area now known as Lebanon and Syria. The British assumed control of Palestine and Iraq. In 1926, the borders were redrawn and Lebanon was separated from Syria. Britain installed the Emir Faisal, who had been deposed by the French in Syria, as ruler of the new kingdom of Iraq. In 1922, the British created the emirate of Trans jordan, which incorporated all of Palestine east of the Jordan River. This was done so that the Emir Abdullah, whose family had been defeated in tribal warfare in the Arabian peninsula, would have a kingdom to rule. None of the countries that border Israel became independent until this century. Many other Arab nations became independent after Israel.

Israel granted full citizenship to all of the Palestinian Arabs who fell within its borders after the War of Independence. Arabic is an official language in Israel. Israel remains to this day one of the few countries in the Middle East where Arabs can legitimately vote--and it is the only one where women can vote.

The West Bank was never legally part of Jordan. Under the UN's 1947 Partition Plan--which the Jews accepted and the Arabs rejected--it was to have been part of an independent Arab state in western Palestine. But the Jordanian army invaded and occupied it during the 1948 war. In 1950, Jordan annexed the West Bank. Only two governments--Great Britain and Pakistan--formally recognized the Jordanian takeover. The rest of the world, including the United States, never did. During the 1950-1967 period of its occupation, Jordan permitted terrorists to launch raids into Israel. Amman lost the West Ban

[The Advocate]

MUQ wrote:

<quoted text>
The one which is being passed in Most Western Countries and which in religious circles is knows an "Modern Materialistic Atheist Philosophy".
And it has become "fashionable" these days for people to associate with it, even religious people are afraid to say these days that they "believe in their scriptures"....it is only fanatic and Fundamental Muslims who stick out their neck and say 'We reject this Modern Materialistic Atheist Philosophy and we accept Islamic philosophy which was presented in Quran and sayings and actions of Our Prophet"

There isn't a single word for that kind of concept,
I think what you're trying to say is "secularism," but it doesn't really place much of an emphasis on materialism, as it's mostly about separating religion from the state and certain areas of the public sphere.

And I think you might have a better time also exploring other philosophical concepts outside and in Islam, such as Sufism and Deism. It's important to know the opinions of others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_philosop...

It's a very eye opening experience whether you agree or disagree with certain philosophies or not.

[MUQ]

-

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

CIA Lies About Lies
The Iraq War and the Persistent Myth of ‘Intelligence Failure’

By Jeremy R. Hammond (Contd.)

On August 17, the DOE released an additional extensive analysis, once again observing, as had the IAEA, that Iraq had previously used tubes with “the same specifications” to manufacture rockets. The DOE reiterated that the tubes were not well suited for a centrifuge and that the aluminum used “provides performance roughly half that of the materials Iraq previously pursued.” Furthermore, the diameter of the tubes was smaller than any known centrifuge and “too thick for favorable use as rotor tubes, exceeding the nominal 1-mm thickness of known aluminum rotor tubes by more than a factor of three.” In other words, as the Senate Committee later noted,“The dimensions of the tubes seized do not ‘match’ the dimensions of any of Zippe’s centrifuge designs.” Moreover, the DOE also noted, the anodized surface “is not consistent with a gas centrifuge application”, which was “unlikely”. Rather,“a rocket production application is the more likely end use for these tubes.”

Apparently still relying entirely upon the CIA’s assessment, the DIA issued a report in November acknowledging that “alternative uses for the tubes are possible, such as rocket motor cases or rocket launch tubes” but parroting once again the false claim that “the specifications are consistent with earlier Iraqi gas centrifuge rotor designs.” The DOE tried to set the record straight yet again in a report in December that stated,“The wall thickness is three times greater than that for metal rotor designs used in high-speed centrifuges”—including the Zippe design. The DOE’s experts pointed out the inefficiency of any centrifuge built using these tubes, concluding,“In short, we judge it unlikely that anyone could deploy an enrichment facility capable of producing weapons significant quantities of HEU [highly-enriched uranium] based on these tubes.” One analyst later expressed his view to the Senate Committee that if Iraq truly intended these tubes for use in a centrifuge, then “we should just give them the tubes.”

The CIA was undeterred, publishing another report on August 1, 2002 ignoring the DOE assessment and claiming that the tubes’ supposed high tolerances, high cost, and secrecy in procurement were evidence that they were intended for centrifuges. The DIA the following month once again repeated the false claim that alternative uses were “possible” but “less likely because the specifications are consistent with late-1980s Iraqi gas centrifuge rotor designs.” Again in September, the CIA repeated as evidence for an intended centrifuge application its false claims of secrecy in procurement, high cost, tight tolerances, the anodized coating, and that the tubes “matched” known centrifuge specifications. It concluded that it was “unlikely” they were intended for a rocket program.

[MUQ]

While administration officials stated as fact that the tubes were intended for centrifuges and that they couldn’t be used for any other purpose, that the nation’s top experts on centrifuges at the DOE disagreed became public information long before the invasion of Iraq. David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) released a report on September 23, 2002 that noted,“In fact, the intelligence community is deeply divided about the purpose of the tubing, with a significant number of experts knowledgeable about gas centrifuges dissenting from the CIA view.” Furthermore, Albright wrote,

“ISIS has learned that U.S. nuclear experts who dissent from the Administration’s position are expected to remain silent.” In a second later report, Albright relayed that one expert “said that people in the administration can ‘release whatever they like, and they expect us to be silent.’” The New York Times similarly later reported that on September 13, after the administration had leaked information about the tubes to the press and made their rounds on the talk shows touting their claims,“the Energy Department sent a directive forbidding employees from discussing the subject with reporters.” Albright also made publicly known that the tubes would have to be modified significantly in order to be used for centrifuges, and also that UNSCOM had seen thousands of similar tubes in Iraq—for use in its rocket program. Further public information contradicting the U.S. government’s claims came when the British government released a dossier on September 24, 2002 admitting that “there is no definitive intelligence that it is destined for a nuclear programme.”

The CIA released an unclassified version of its National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraqi WMD in October 2002, which stated that the tubes “could be used in a centrifuge enrichment program. Most intelligence specialists assess this to be to be the intended use, but some believe that these tubes are probably intended for conventional weapons programs.” Thus “most intelligence specialists” included “Joe” and a number of analysts within the CIA and DIA, while excluding the nation’s top experts on centrifuges who had repeatedly pointed out that the CIA and DIA assessments were relying on false information.

By contrast, the classified version of the NIE noted that the DOE “assesses that the tubes probably are not part of” a nuclear weapons program. The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), it also noted,“accepts the judgment of technical experts at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose. INR considers it far more likely that the tubes are intended for another purpose, most likely the production of artillery rockets. The very large quantities being sought, the way the tubes were tested by the Iraqis, and the atypical lack of attention to operational security in the procurement efforts are among the factors, in addition to the DOE assessment, that lead INR to conclude that the tubes are not intended for use in Iraq’s nuclear weapon program.”

[ocxz]

w wman uk wrote:

<quoted text> No we wont were watching the religion of great offence very carefully. You really dont get it do you prissy. Why not move to murhumna land see how life is there, then you can speak with authority. Instead of being a plastic muslim.

I said you, you answered we.
You haver bi-polar or schyzophrenic personnality, or both maybe ?

[w wman uk]

ocxz wrote:

<quoted text>
I said you, you answered we.
You haver bi-polar or schyzophrenic personnality, or both maybe ?

Dont worry l never seek the aprobation of fools. Such poor grammer and spelling prissy, have you blown a fuse and fallen off you pedestal.

[MUQ]

[QUOTE who="F. Singh"]

01. Agreed! Muslims should have got the help from peace loving majority.

I don't condone oppression of Muslims in anyway. I think my comments give a negative connotation that I do.

02. But one thing I don't agree with you.

The presence of Hindu fanatics in politics isn't the right reason for the Muslims' reluctance to participate in politics.

03. The only possible solution to their problem is their participation in politics. If they really want an end to their problems, they have to come forward rather than being just whiny.

[/QUOTE]

Ans.

01. Thanks for your sensible post and I agree with your comments.

02. The reason why Muslims in India did not start their own party was due to special circumstances that were prevailing at the time of partition. The atmosphere was "wrongly created" that Pakistan is for "All Muslims of India"…. While in reality there was no such condition. It was only to separate Border Muslim states and not get all Muslims out of India.

There were many Muslims at the highest levels in Congress party, but soon after Independence the congress party started marginalizing them….so much so that hardly any one remembers that Muslims had a sizable hands in getting Independence from British.

03. It is not the presence of Hindu Fanatics that stops making Muslims a party of their own. It is the hype created by Media and Govt. and its Police and Admin. That re-create the "partition scenario"!! See Muslims are making their party and that means "another partition" of India.

04. I know, no community helps any other community to get up and organize. But they should at least not "suppress it and create road blocks in its path".

Muslims have to share the blame no doubt, but no one should put 'all the blame" on them and feel snug at their non development, it is after all a national loss, if so many of its population is suffering due to X or Y reason.

[MUQ]

Advocate wrote:

There isn't a single word for that kind of concept,

I think what you're trying to say is "secularism," but it doesn't really place much of an emphasis on materialism, as it's mostly about separating religion from the state and certain areas of the public sphere.

And I think you might have a better time also exploring other philosophical concepts outside and in Islam, such as Sufism and Deism. It's important to know the opinions of others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_philosop ...

It's a very eye opening experience whether you agree or disagree with certain philosophies or not.

Ans.

Each word which I used in my post is well understood. Modern Materialistic Atheist Philosophy, which of this word you did not understand?

Secularism is a part of the Modern Materialistic Atheist Philosophy, not the whole of it.

Separating religion from state is a standard Christian concept, because Jesus did not leave any directions about it, so Christians are clueless as to how to act on this.

I am so busy in telling about Islam that I have no time to study Sufism and Deism, if you have studied it, then present their beliefs and I will comment how for they are supported by Islam.

Once you have Gold Standard, you do not go about analyzing Bronze or Copper or Zinc Standards…. It is these standards who get to be certified and corrected against the Gold Standard.

Islam’s position is the same vis a vis other isms and ity ‘.

[The Advocate]

MUQ wrote:

<quoted text>
Ans.
Each word which I used in my post is well understood. Modern Materialistic Atheist Philosophy, which of this word you did not understand?
Secularism is a part of the Modern Materialistic Atheist Philosophy, not the whole of it.
Separating religion from state is a standard Christian concept, because Jesus did not leave any directions about it, so Christians are clueless as to how to act on this.
I am so busy in telling about Islam that I have no time to study Sufism and Deism, if you have studied it, then present their beliefs and I will comment how for they are supported by Islam.
Once you have Gold Standard, you do not go about analyzing Bronze or Copper or Zinc Standards…. It is these standards who get to be certified and corrected against the Gold Standard.
Islam’s position is the same vis a vis other isms and ity ‘.

I understood what you're trying to say, but there's no word for all of those concepts put together. Just because someone is relgioues doesn't prevent that person from being materialistic, and just because someone is Atheistic doesn't mean that person is modern (and so on and so forth).

Secularism isn't a Christian concept...it can be applied to several areas, but the fact remains that it's still a relatively young concept.

And I'm not so sure it's valid to say that Islam/religion in general is the "gold standard." There is a HUGE amount of flaws and horribly outdated concepts and rules in any religion. By refusing to actually learn about other philosophies I think you are denying yourself the virtue of learning and curiosity. I'm not trying to say that you should abandon religion; rather, you can't analyse other concepts if you don't know much about them. That's why I'm rather skeptical about your "analysis" on any non Islamic tradition.

I'm not an expert on many religions, but I have at least tried to learn about the dangers of a religiously based society. That in itself can be applied broadly.

[w wman uk]

The Advocate wrote:

<quoted text>
I understood what you're trying to say, but there's no word for all of those concepts put together. Just because someone is relgioues doesn't prevent that person from being materialistic, and just because someone is Atheistic doesn't mean that person is modern (and so on and so forth).
Secularism isn't a Christian concept...it can be applied to several areas, but the fact remains that it's still a relatively young concept.
And I'm not so sure it's valid to say that Islam/religion in general is the "gold standard." There is a HUGE amount of flaws and horribly outdated concepts and rules in any religion. By refusing to actually learn about other philosophies I think you are denying yourself the virtue of learning and curiosity. I'm not trying to say that you should abandon religion; rather, you can't analyse other concepts if you don't know much about them. That's why I'm rather skeptical about your "analysis" on any non Islamic tradition.
I'm not an expert on many religions, but I have at least tried to learn about the dangers of a religiously based society. That in itself can be applied broadly.

l agree islam is definatly not a gold standaed. More like a lead yoke around it believers necks particularly the women. mug is to much of a coward to admit the faults and fault lines in islam.

[w wman uk]

Separating religion from state is a standard Christian concept, because Jesus did not leave any directions about it, so Christians are clueless as to how to act on this. What rubish it to hundreds of years and milions of lives to seperate religion from state. The murhumna want evolution to run backwards its not going to happen is it?