Not a lot of people know this but Zong eventually made his old man proud.He went AWOL from the Chinese military,took to the hills for a few thousand years,before turning up here in the U.K.

And I can prove it.

http://www.wizardzong.co.uk/

Looking forward to crossing swords/ploughshares with you again,very soon.

If Lao-tse is such a wonderful role model,why do you think his own son joined the army and became a soldier?   ;-)

First you actually confuse meaning of interpretation and revelation,now you show feigned confusion over the difference between  pessimism and realism.

"I have no idea about reactions".Kappert,THAT is a LIE,and you KNOW it.

You know as well as I do what the fundamentalist reaction would/is/will be.You deliberately evade the issue because you KNOW that it would be a VIOLENT response,which would be met in turn by more violence,with pacifism having no constructive part to play in the final outcome.

I have a final question which I will leave until later in the day.Thank you for your time.

Are you now claiming that these non-Arab Muslims are toying with the possibility that the Qur'an DOES contain errors? If so,how do you suppose that the fundamentalists will react to this news? How do you suppose these 'constructivists' will be able to convince the 'fundamentalists' to accept this new development without bloodshed?

btw: You previously refused to personally criticize the content of the Qur'an out of respect for ALL Muslims.However,you now appear to be taking sides with the 'constructivist' against the 'fundamentalists...

Think about it.

Thank you.

I fear that you are confusing the term 'interpretation' and 'revelation'.

see: http://www.answering-islam.com/ac.htm

Again, I ask the question,where in the world (past or present) can you find evidence of a devout Muslim who agrees with those non-Muslims who claim that the Qur'an contains "errors"?

Within the Islamic scholars, the website Tauheed and Sunnah Islamic Library corresponds to our university libraries. http://www.tauheed-sunnat.com

Thank you.

Now,you check my last post again  and see why that  excellent website is invalid. Please,try again.

N.B.  Non-Islamic sources do NOT count.I am asking you to provide examples of Islamic scholars quoting Islamic sources.

Thank you.

"Just as the Bible,the Qur'an had several 'editions' through time,so I do not think that the scholars regard the book as error-free".

Let me get this clear because I do not wish to place words in your mouth.If I understand you correctly you are making one 'claim' and one assumption here.

Your Claim: That the Qur'an has been edited several times since its revelation to Muhammed.

Your Assumption: That some Muslim scholars are aware of this 'fact' and would be prepared to admit to it in public.

Kappert,please,please,please,try to find me some evidence for this thesis of yours then get back to me a.s.a.p.

Thank you.

You say that it is not up to you to criticize The Sunnah or Ahadith because:

a) They are disputed by Muslim scholars.

b) They are fundamental texts forming a religious belief.

However, ALL Muslims believe the Qur'an to be error-free.Consequently,anything written in the Qur'an which runs counter to your own Taoist principles needs to be studied and challenged.Which brings me back to the question,why are you so reluctant to do so?

Thank you.

You make some interesting and valid points.However,what is NOT in dispute here is that in order to be a Muslim you MUST adopt Muhammed as your role model.Moreover,if you were a Muslim you would not be afforded the luxury of picking and choosing your favourite role model.

In addition to reading the Qur'an have you also read the Sunnah and Ahadith?If your answer is in the affirmative and based upon what you have read,do you have any specific criticisms to make of either the Qur'an,Muhammed or his Companions?Moreover,do you consider Muhammed to be a good role model for contemporary Islam and its many adherents?

Thank you.

In your own time,Kappert,in your own time.

Which takes us back to one of my previous questions:

Have you read the Qur'an?

Yes/No

Condemn (with equal vigour) the American Indian,Hamas,Hezbollah etc., for THEIR decision to choose war when "language" fails and I'll characterize you as a principled (if somewhat naive) individual.Fail to do so and I'll continue to criticize you for the naive hypocrite that you are.

In which case and when language fails;

How do you justify your support for the American Indians decision to fight and kill the palefaces in defence of their ancestral homelands? Was their war 'just'? Ditto Hamas,Hezbollah etc.,

You wrote: "I presume that any 'good' results from negotiations,NOT NECESSARILY from war". 

You did NOT write: "I presume that any 'good' ALWAYS results from negotiation,NEVER from war".

Am I to assume from the phrasing of that response that you DO accept that SOMETIMES,under certain circumstances,war IS  both "NECESSARY" and "JUST"?

Circle still not squared.Continue,please.

Run that by me again.When and HOW did Europe (supposedly) become multicultural? 

"Europe has been multicultural since the Great Migration in the 4th century".

Let's take a look at a few 'facts':

* You cite the Great Migration as the point in history when  Europe became multicultural.

* You (erroneously) peddle the belief that multiculturalism is a 'good' thing and that Europeans should be proud of it.

* You are a pacifist.You eschew violence of all kinds for whatever reason and under any given set of circumstances.

(NB:Convenient exceptions to this rule include: Violence perpetrated by Jihadists,American 'Red' Indians fighting the wicked palefaces etc.,)

And yet:

* Without the violent upheavals which were part and parcel of the Great Migration, your (faux) multicultural Europe could never have taken shape.

In other words,and looking at this from your perspective,from violent upheaval came a supposed 'good',which is always 'bad' because no 'good' ever comes as the result of violence,correct?                                             

Perhaps you'd care to square THAT circle for me because one of us is confused.

@kappert

"Perhaps you know that most Europeans do not want to 'battle' Islam, or
any war whatsoever. Unlike the USA, Europe (still) does not depend on
military endeavours. Our reality is that our neighbours come from
Scotland, Germany, France, Ukraine, Morocco, Turkey, Nigeria, Japan and
the USA. Europe has been multicultural since the Great Migration in the
4th century."

If Europe chooses not to fight Izlam, and thus to allow itself to be totally overrun and become Izlamic, I think you will find that Americans will lose interest in Europe to a significant degree. We will have very little in common with you anymore. Americans will fight Izlam, and we will win the fight. It will probably be messy, down right bloody probably, but we will win it rather than roll over and see our society be converted to Izlam.

Our interest in Europe is based on our perceived common heritage, but when that is gone, we will be separate peoples. At that point, I'm pretty sure, we will cease to bother you.

"I rather miss Europeans from the South and the East to pronounce themselves in the BJ - it's far too angloamerican."

It would be nice, but, I think the language barrier has a lot to do with non-English speaking posters being under-represented.

"The lack of knowing Europe drives them to ridiculous remarks and personal attacks."

Europeans are much more ignorant of America, kappert.  Europe's lefty media monopoly is rabidly anti-American and distorts even basic facts about America. Most Europeans form their impressions of America from Hollywood movies.

@ kappert

My personal favourite(s)?

Bill Gates (and Warren Buffett).

Bill Gates:

(Literally as well as figuratively) Poking his nose into the business affairs of China,India,South Korea,Taiwan,Eastern Europe and maybe even France.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24668

As an American, I am concerned with how Europe battles Islam.  I want Europe to succeed and win.  I don't agree with Bush's 'light unto the Muslims nations' democracy fiasco.  I have zero respect for him and I am a Republican.  As we battle to stop Muslim immigration to America, I hope to see European states lead us in this fight.

Of the past twenty posts most are from the desk of the brussels journal. Is this is an american writer?

"It's far too angloamerican".

Do you think EU quotas might help?

"I rather miss Europeans from the South and East to pronounce themselves in the BJ".

I agree.So,who and what is stopping them? 

"Commentators from the other side of the pond like 'to get involved' in Europe,that makes them feel better in a sense of 'post-WWII-protection".

@ kappert

Where do some of these Yanks get off poking their noses into European affairs? It all starts at the top you know.If they're not mouthing some meaningless sound bite like "Ich bin ein Berliner",they're lecturing our democratically elected leaders to "tear down this or that wall".I mean,really...

Somebody needs to give these bounders a damned good thrashing.

Where IS Europe's Hugo Chavez when we need him the most?

Clive Davis's blog is painful to read.  He got his education from one of the best universities in Europe, but he has failed to master something as simple as basic punctuation.  If there is a restricitve element, he will incorrectly set it off with commas.  If there is a nonrestrictive element, he will incorrectly leave the commas out.  Or he will insert a comma before the element, but not after the element -- the sort of amateur mistake one sees in freshman essays at university.  It's bizarre.  The blogosphere has handed a megaphone to the incompetent and unexceptional.

Commentators from the other side of the pond like 'to get involved' in Europe, that makes them feel better in a sense of 'post-WWII-protection'. The lack of knowing Europe drives them to ridiculous remarks and personal attacks. I rather miss Europeans from the South and the East to pronounce themselves in the BJ - it's far too angloamerican.

Who's next?  Clive Pollard,Stephen Davis,Sir Stephen Pollard-Davis...never heard of 'em.

I don't  think that these journalists really appreciate the gravity of the European situation.