Can't find it, cause the tags are different, but this is a dupe.....

Not a dupe, as far as I can tell. There is another similar Wafa Sultan video on videosift but the content does not overlap. Maybe they are disjoint extracts from the same interview.

Every once in a while someone who doesn't know a thing about Islam and the middle east posts this as some kind of insightful commentary on the problem of terrorism. If you really believe the by-line of Islamic terrorism then you are willingly deceiving yourself. Saddam Hussein was not a Muslim, he was a secular dictator. For him to affiliate with religious parties was akin to giving away power and control. The current Shi'a and Sunni conflict is not prevalent throughout the world. It's rather be exasperated by terrorists who want to plunge Iraq and the US military into civil war. This is nothing but a willing submission to the idea of the clash of civilizations. Which I believe is inherently stupid.

I dislike Wafa Sultan because she doesn't attack the issue where it needs to be attacked and rather seems to insult everyone who practices the Islamic faith.

Saddam Hussein was not a Muslim, he was a secular dictator.

And the last word that came out of that vermins mouth was..?

Don't brush everyone who follows a faith with the same broad brush.

You are right, but missing the point. The point is that Islam, when interpreted a certain way, leads to a twisted worldview. Now, its common to say that that certain way of interpretation is a sick, twisted, perverted,politically inspired way of interpreting it. However, to anyone who reads the Qur'an, it is not hard to see that you dont need to twist or turn a single word of the Qur'an to justify murder, from a neutral point of view, it even seems to be the interpretation that falls naturally.

HOWEVER, that doesnt mean that this is the most COMMON interpretation, thankfully , most muslims interpret the scripture in a milder form.

But, still, saying "Islam/religion had little or nothing to do with it" is equal to saying "The man could not have drowned, I drink water every day, and havent suffered the slightest side effect"

Am sorry but your arguement fails logically within the historical time frame, if the Qu'ran really preached a religion of hate and oppression, then the entire Mediterranean would now be speaking Arabic. I suggest you watch this and learn about the faith you vehemently criticize.

Islam, followed by more than a billion people today, is the world's fastest growing religion and will soon be the world's largest. The 1.2 billion Muslims make up approximately one quarter of the world's population, and the Muslim population of the United States now outnumbers that of Episcopalians. The most populous Muslim countries are Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India. The number of Muslims in Indonesia alone (175 million) exceeds the combined total in Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran, the traditional heartlands of Islam. There are also substantial Muslim populations in Europe and North America, whether converts or immigrants who began arriving in large numbers in the 1950s and 1960s. In keeping with tradition, the two main branches of Islam today are Sunni and Shiite.

Beginning in the 1970s and 1980s Islam remerged as a potent political force, associated with both reform and revolution. Given the large number of adherents, it is no surprise that Muslims incorporate a broad and diverse spectrum of positions in regard to liberalism and democracy. Some are secularists who want to disengage religion from politics. Others are reformers, who reinterpret Islamic traditions in support of elective forms of government. Still there are others who reject democracy entirely.

MEMRI TV - A WARNING:

In my daily trawl through YouTube I have encountered many videos from Memri TV. This website only shows the very worst of the Islamic world - radical fringe preachers with little or no public support, unobjective critics of America and Israel, anti-semites, holocaust deniers, misogynists, etc. However, it presents these opinions as if they are widely held, rarely questioned, and representative of the Islamic world. Further more - and this is particularly worrying - the site often mistranslates, or takes out of context, what major Islamic leaders are saying in order to make them seem more extreme and bigotted. The site uses an Arabic title and icon in order to try and disguise its real agenda.

Who are Memri? They send out their videos to all senators and congressmen, and all mainstream media, so we should really know something about them!

MEMRI was founded in 1998 by its president Yigal Carmon, a retired colonel from Israeli military intelligence, and the academic Dr. Meyrav Wurmser. Meyrav Wurmser and her husband David Wurmser were both co authors of A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (Israel) which was the precursor for the Wolfowitz doctrine- which led to PNAC - Project for the New American Century. Dr. Meyrav Wurmser received her doctorate at George Washington University, by researching the life and works of Vladimir Jabotinsky, the founder of Revisionist Zionism. Her husband David Wurmser works directly under Vice President Dick Cheney and his chief of staff Lewis "Scooter" Libby. It was David Wurmser that told Dick Cheney that Wilson's wife Plame was the one that sent Wilson to Niger.

MEMRI's headquarters are in Washington DC. It is a non-profit organization, exempt from taxation, that has private donors. MEMRI's largest donor is The Bradley Foundation. The Bradley Foundation has also provided funding for the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). PNAC brought together prominent members of the (George W) Bush Administration (Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz) in the late 1990s to articulate their neoconservative foreign policy.

Farhad, nobody here suggested Saddam Hussein's primary claim to infamy was his support of terrorism. His official military actions as head of state were bad enough.
And nobody suggested Saddam Hussein was a Muslim.

She's alluding to the the ethical and intellectual vacuum of believing that morality is determined by the "word of God": fallible scriptures based on fallible oral recitations from a fallible slave-owning illiterate businessman who might or might not have heard God's declaration of what's right and wrong, which mere declaration couldn't affect the ethicality of deeds anyway. Since scripture is continually stretched and reinterpreted to fit the changing moral zeitgeist anyway, it's rational to instead use our innate sense of morality.

Believing in falsehoods can, not suprisingly, have negative consequences. She's talking about the huge contrast between conventional Islamic worldviews and new secularist worldviews informed by science.
She's not just anti-Islam. She's anti-theist. What is so threatening about a person just using words to try to convince you? What is so threatening about the idea that belief in the lie that martyrs are rewarded in heaven increases terrorism? Whereas others seek to undermine terrorism by undermining particular dogmas that support it (that most muslims don't believe anyway), she would undermine terrorism with a more general undermining of religion. This makes sense in the context of the several books recently published (The God Delusion, God Is Not Great, etc...)

*discard

Self-discarding this video (discard called by original submitter jwray)

*kill

Permanently discarding this video - kill requested by submitter jwray.