SKM wrote:

1. America has a super plural society having many religions (Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Jews, Buddhas etc). Every day, every hour or every minutewe are sick and tired of hearing in the radio, TV, or newspapers some very common (colorful) adjectives, such as: Muslim militants, Muslim terrorists, Islamic terrorists, Islamic radicals, and Islamic militants, Islamic fanatics, Al-Qeada, and Taliban. My question is that, why do not we hear about terrorists or radicals of any other religions? Why do not we hear these kind of ear-soothing colorful adjectives about those millions of atheists, agnostics or even Homosexual guys? Why it is always attached with the peaceful (?) ISLAM?
   
   SKM's accusation reminds me a line from a Simon-Gurfunkel song: "a man hears what he wants to hear and disregrads the rest". There are terrorists and radicals of other religion, e.g. the Irish Republican Army (IRA), the Jewish terrorist group Gush Emunim, the Hindu radicals of RSS and Shiv Shena in India, the anti-abortionist (who kill innocent doctors) and radical religious right groups of the USA (remember Oklahoma?), etc., etc. The reason they have not been not talked about much lately becuase the 9/11 events have shifted the attention of the western media to the Islamic militants.
   
2. In the North America and throughout the western worldthere are hundreds of societies bearing the name of only one religion and that is ISLAM. Examples: AMC, AMA, NABIC, ICNA, ISNA, CAIR etc. etc. There are hundreds of Ummatic organizations/societies throughout the North America and elsewhere in the whole world. Ummatic organizations mostly preach segregation/isolation of Muslims from other peoples in general in the host countries. They teach Muslims that they are superior and their religion is superior and ask to guard their children from mixing with the western "rotten" society. As a result, future generations of Muslims can not blend with the society of host country resulting isolationists and problematic youngsters in an alien society. Ultimate result is the scenario of item# 13 below. In this, I have many questions: How many Ummatic organizations for Hindu, Christian or Jews can we find? Why no such organization is needed by any other religions? Why only the people of Muslim origin need such Ummatic organization? What is the purpose of such organization?

   There are religious organizations (outside Islam) of all kinds all over the world, e.g. Bible societies, missionary schools (Christian madrassah's?), NGOs promoting Christianity among the poor, Krishna Consciousness groups in Europe and North America. Please do some research on your own.   

3. Can we find Jihadi organization in any other religions such: Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Hizbullah, Horkut-ul- Jihad, Horkut-ul-mujahedin, Jaise Muhamad, Jihad-e-Muhammad, Tahrik-e-Nifaj-shariaat-e-Muhammad, Al-Hikhma, Al-badr-Mujaheddin, Jamah-e-Islamia, Hijb-e-Islamia, etc. etc.??? We can find several dozens of Jihadi Islamic terrorist organizations exists in every Muslim country throughout the world. Can we find such organization in other religions? If not, then why?
   
   Please see my response concerning item-1.
   
4. We can find dozens of countries ruled by Islamic Shariaat (Huhud laws) where Quran is the only viable constitution. Remaining Muslim majority countries also have family laws enforced as per Quranic laws. We can still find many Islamic Republics exist in this modern world of 21^st century. My questions here are: Can we find any country ruled by Bible, Old Testament or Ghita today? Can we find just one Republic for Christian, Jewish, Hindus or Buddhas? If the answer is no, then please tell us why no?

   Vatican is ruled by the Bible. India is now ruled by the BJP who wants to establish a nation based on Hindu scriptures.

5.  
6. Honor killing is the most inhuman and most disgraceful act by any human standard. This act is condemned by any sane human being today. But surprisinglythis horrendous episode is only present in the Muslim countries and Muslim societies. Islamists will argue that there is nothing in the Quran which suggests honor killing! Well, question here is, if Islam has nothing to do with it, then why it is only practiced by Muslims? NO OTHER SOCIETIES EXCEPT ISLAM PRACTICE IT, PERIOD. Even in the same countryexample Nigeria, Northern Nigerian (Muslims) do practice this heinous act, but Southern Nigeria (Christians) do not practice this at all. It may present in any country in the whole worldbut 100% sure that it will happened only in a Muslim family. My questions here areplease tell me why Muslims only perform this heinous act? Why this act is totally absent in any other religions?
   
   Honor killing is not prescribed by Islam. Honor killing still takes place in some middle eastern countries mainly due to social and cultural backwardness. You probably know about the recent occurrence of the practice of Sati (burning of a widow with her dead husband on the funeral pyre) in India, which is a form of honor killing.
   
7. Today in the whole world Muslims are apologetic to the entire humankind for the shameful terrorisms and constantly trying to erase this stigma by various apologetic fruitless arguments and excuses. They are trying very hard to disown Osam Bin Laden and other Islamic terrorists by saying "Islam has been hijacked" etc. Very recently, ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) held four days full-fledged program in the Washington, D.C. to disown the burden of doubt in Islam by using same-old apologetic slogans"Islam is a religion of peace" or Prophet Muhammad is the Gods mercy to earth" etc. These Islamists of North America also tried to fool the westerners (may be they fooled themselves) by quoting a few good/kind Quranic verses. They all simply blamed Western Media for projecting Islam as the religion of terrorism. With much hypocrisy they absolutely hide all those hundreds of hateful/dreadful Quranic verses. My question here iswhy any other religionists do not need to do all these hypocrisies like Islamists are doing today?

   Any religious scripture, including Bible, Torah, Gita, etc., contain a lot of violent passages as well as peaceful passages. Common people try to filter out (mostly in their subconscious) the violent passges and practice the peaceful directives. Fundamentalists of all kind (religious and anti-religious), however, insists on literal interpretation of scripture. This causes all sorts of problems.  For example, if a good, nonviolent (and possibly uninformed) Muslim believes that his religion is peaceful, does his/her conviction cause any problem for society? But if someone like you pokes in his/her eyes to tell that "real Islam" is against peace (e.g., by quoting certain "unpeaceful passages" from the Quran in various e-forums on a weekly basis ), there is a good chance that that person will gradually turn to violence rather than giving up his/her religious faith.  

8. "Jihad" is the most fearful and despised word spoken/uttering throughout the whole world today. This famous word "Jihad" belongs to one religion, and that is"Islam". My question iswhy Jihad belongs to only Islam?

   There is "Crusade" for the Christians, which is a concept similar to Jihad.

9. Suicide-bombing only to kill innocent human beings is committed by Muslims only. In Palestine-Israeli conflict hundreds of incidents of such heinous suicide attempts have occurred so far. It was quite obvious that all these suicide bombers were brainwashed by the fiery inspirational teachings by Islamic clergy citing various Quranic dictums and hadiths. Among the Palestine citizens there are good percentage of Christian minority who support Palestinian cause and they are also enemy of Israel. Surprisingly, not a single "suicide bomber" could be found who was a Christian. My questions here arewhy there was no suicide bomber evolved out of those Christian-born Palestinians? Why it is the only Muslims committing this horrendous act of suicide bombing?

   The Christian Palestinians have not been subjected to as much terror and injustice as their Muslim counterparts. Besides the Christians have already committed much heinous acts on the Jews in the past, killing them by the millions just about 60 years ago. 

10.  
11. Pure (Pukka) Muslims: all most all the terrorists (John walker Lind, Zakaria Moussai, Padia etc.) so far arrested or known to the authority are very pure and devoutly good practicing bearded Muslims. Just last week, Swedish authority has arrested one suspected terrorist from onboard an aircraft who attempted to hijack the plane and crash it to the American Embassy in the Western Europe. Later he was identified as the bearded young Tunisian born devout Muslim by the name Kerim shatty who wanted to go to join the Islamic conference in London. My questions are: Why they (terrorists) could not be from some moderate or not so good Muslim group? Why always terrorist have to be one of those most devout pukka Muslims? What possibly is the obvious indication here? Isnt it true that any true followers (real Muslim who follows Quran and hadiths) of Islam could be a terrorist?

    It may be so that many Islamic terrorists are "Pukka Muslims" as SKM defines the term, but it is unfair to conclude that any and every pukka Muslim could become a terrorist. My grandfather was a very pious Muslim, but he never took part in any terrorist activities. Surely SKM can find many such examples if he looks for them without being prejudiced.

12.  
13. Clash of immigrants with the host: very recently, there were riots between the immigrant British citizens and the host Britons. Surprisingly those immigrant British citizens were none other than the Muslim immigrants (mainly Pakistani and Bangladeshi). Britain has the immigrants from various countries and various religions. My question here is why those rioting-immigrants could not be from any other religions?
    
    You are now trying to justify the neo-fascists' attack on Bangladeshi immigrants because Islam is the main religion of the latter group?! The riots in UK were not religiously motivated at all. For Pete's sake SKM, do not insult the people of Bangladesh in Mukto-mona forum on such silly ground. 
    
14. Dress code and food restriction: Do you know Islam has a special dress code for both men and women? Islam is nothing but Arab nationalism in the disguise of religion. Anybody from any foreign land convert to Islam also needs to adopt/change his dress and cultural habits, which is nothing but Arab national dress and Arab culture. A devout Bangladeshi, Chinese or a Burmese convert to Islam will pretend to be a good Muslim by wearing Arab garb or hijab for women, even though his/her own national dress is not at all similar to Arab national dress. Muslims also follow very strict food codes. Unlike other religious groups, Muslims can not eat western most hygienically produced meat products. Muslims need to eat so called un-hygienically produced halal meat. Convert Muslims even need to learn Arabic for daily rituals of Islam. They are not allowed to pray in their own mother tongue. Result is they do not know what they are praying. But unlike Muslim convert, Hindu, Christian or Jewish converts do not need to forsake their own national dress code or languages. My questions here are why the converts of no other religions need to change their own national dress code or food habits? Why Islam is so different?
    
    There are dress codes in other religions, e.g. Sikh men wear turbans. There are food restriction in other religion - the Hindus do not eat beef, the Jews do not eat port, the Buddhists and many Hindus do not eat any meat or fish. As a person obsessed with religion, SKM should know these basic facts. (By the way, conversion to Hindu religion is not permitted.)