quilp Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 This gentleman does not represent Muslims or Islam. Please take the time to read this article http://www.juancole.com/2013/04/islamic-forbids-terrorism.html As-salamu alaykum Shalom Aleikhem... A welcome addition to the forum, if you really are muslim that is, and not a Taqiyya troll I'll assume you are legit, for now. It's all about 'interpretation' isn't it? There'd be no point posting the endless verses from the koran, sunnah and hadiths, that tell of a different form of Islam which differs markedly from the one in your link. It is this ambiguity that preceeds which direction is taken by the believer. And then, there's the biggest trouble-maker of all, the schism within the tribes of the Sunni and Shia, devisive and deadly, as we are witnessing from the scripturally-inspired madness going on in the Middle East. From your 'name', I'm assuming you're Sufi. The book does convey an image of peace and love; how Allah would prefer Islam to be, would he not? The problem occurs when other muslims say their interpretation of the books is the one that counts for them, and which of Muhammad's descendants they've chosen to follow. It's this ambiguity and subjective interpretation which divides the Ummah and the deadly example of this is the rise of ISIS, out of Syria and their off-shoots. They follow their interpretation and the methods of violence mirror some of the horror-stories attributed to Muhammad's expansionism out of the Middle East. The supremacist nature of the ISIS 'crusade' in those lands is no different to 6-700AD when the ''Perfect Man'' spoke/stabbed/slashed the words of Allah. The violent symbolism is not lost on everybody. It is this interpretation creating the most violence, all over the world. So, can one interpretation of Islam easily disassociate itself from another? Is it possible to remove Islam from the 'Islamist'? What does the term, ''moderate muslim'', actually mean? It all seems too confusing and abstract to an old Mushrikun like me, looking from the outside in. To the actions of those murderers, you claim they don't act in your name; it would be a good move if muslims got together and did this more often. As would pro-actively tackling the radicalisation going on here in the U.K., within their community, though more recently we've seen some co-operation in this way. While muslims kill muslims in great order, to establish the caliphate, or not, the world suffers too. ISIS, Taleban, Boko Haram, Al-qaeda and a multitude of sub-groups, all inspired to Jihad from their interpretation of the writings, fighting in the name of Islam backed by proxy through the house of Saud and Iran. Dreadful, and worse to come... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 thousands of radicalised, angry young muslim(as) Maybe if we stopped bombing them on a daily basis, maybe they would be a little more amenable to talking to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 thousands of radicalised, angry young muslim(as) Maybe if we stopped bombing them on a daily basis, maybe they would be a little more amenable to talking to us. Maybe. Let's not forget that from April 1983 up to August 2001, there were 35 notable and deadly attacks by Islamic Jihad organisations against Western civilian and military targets around the world. From foreign embassies to Spanish restaurants to Israeli kids on a bus and fast-food outlets to US warships, et al. Over a thousand dead and many more wounded. All these atrocities occurred pre- 9/11 and Usama Bin Laden, which saw the start of open warfare waged against Islamist organisations in Afghanistan. There have been thousands of attacks and many more hundreds of thousands of deaths since september 11 2001, by Islamic militants under one flag or another. The list does not include the less notable attacks where one or two were killed, nor the hi-jackings, ransom demands and such-like, popular with Islamic terrorists which occured during the seventies. Also not taken into account are the attacks on India, Kuwait, etc., the cowardly suicide-bombings targetting civilians exclusively, by Jihadist's whose motivation was their interpretation of the Koran and Islamic tradition and killing mostly other muslims. The Iran/Iraq war is no better an example of this mind-set. All this blood-shed and madness before 'we' started bombing them, with possibly the exception of Gulf War 1 and the action to relieve Kuwait, the aim of which was the removal of Saddam Hussein's forces from that country where the Iraqi army were carrying out the type of atrocities in common with ISIS. Look at the state of Iraq today. It had a chance after the regime changed, to introduce a fairer society, based on Western-style democracy with freedom and fairness for all yet within months it descended into war and strife; the usual internicine struggle for supremacy between Sunni and Shia at the expense of christians, Druze, Zoroastrians and other sects in the area. All very predictable, in hindsight. Islamic Jihad organisations have been waging war on one tribe or another since Muhammad took to horseback and convinced the pre-Islamic Judeo-christian Middle Eastern Arabs that he was sent by Allah to ethnically-cleanse the area and replace all other religions with Islam or pay the Jizyya. It's his legacy and the interpretation of his teachings that've caused most of the horror and death the world experiences today. The hand-wringing of the Left helps no-one. It's too late for anything other than direct action. It's war-war, not jaw-jaw when it comes to counter-acting the insidious poison and violence wrought upon innocents by scripturally-driven psychopath's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 based on Western-style democracy with freedom and fairness for all How very naïve of you to think that is how real Western-style democracy works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 It's war-war, not jaw-jaw when it comes to counter-acting the insidious poison and violence wrought upon innocents by scripturally-driven psychopath's. For all of them Quilp? For every man woman and child or just the extremists? Won't war-war bring violence against innocents? How will you differentiate? Well of course just the extremist's! Boots on the ground might lessen the collateral damage, as opposed to air-strikes. The violence against the innocents has been long-standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 True story. Most terror attacks carried out on US Soil pre 9/11 were made by Americans or people of white ethnicity. Strange how that changed post 9/11... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 based on Western-style democracy with freedom and fairness for all How very naïve of you to think that is how real Western-style democracy works. Maybe I should've chosen my words more carefully to avoid the reactionary lefty derision and the picking of minor points of any argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Boots on the ground I love this Daily Mail-esque attitude. "We need boots on the ground" "We need to send more troops" "We need action NOW!!!" Usually said by those that won't be putting any boots on the ground, but are happy to send off young men and women in to harms way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 True story. Most terror attacks carried out on US Soil pre 9/11 were made by Americans or people of white ethnicity. Strange how that changed post 9/11... More diversion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 the reactionary lefty Says the right leaning person talking about more bombings of a foreign country and advocating sending more troops into harms way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 True story. Most terror attacks carried out on US Soil pre 9/11 were made by Americans or people of white ethnicity. Strange how that changed post 9/11... More diversion. He who refuses to learn the lessons of the past... Prove me wrong and I will agree with you. Most were carried out by White Supremacist movements, Christian religious nutjobs and groups like the Jewish Defence League Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Boots on the ground I love this Daily Mail-esque attitude. "We need boots on the ground" "We need to send more troops" "We need action NOW!!!" Usually said by those that won't be putting any boots on the ground, but are happy to send off young men and women in to harms way. You're doing it again. Using the language of the Useful Idiot. It is you and people like you who are naive. You are a symptom of the self-hatred which premeates our society, a hatred fomented by the Left to assuage their guilt over the colonialism and empiricism of former times, which is a handy excuse to use when placing the blame for the world's ills. It would be un-necessary to post up links to other news-outlets other than the Daily Mail, which also advocate bombing these (Islamic) terrorists, would you prefer that Islamic state and fundamentalism was allowed to carry on the slaughter of innocents and NOT intervene? That sounds like surrender to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Boots on the ground I love this Daily Mail-esque attitude. "We need boots on the ground" "We need to send more troops" "We need action NOW!!!" Usually said by those that won't be putting any boots on the ground, but are happy to send off young men and women in to harms way. You're doing it again. Using the language of the Useful Idiot. So when are you signing up to do your part? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 January 1, 1969 – April 15, 1970: 8200 Bombings, attempted bombings and bomb threats attributed to "campus disturbances and student unrest" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 January 1, 1969 – April 15, 1970: 8200 Bombings, attempted bombings and bomb threats attributed to "campus disturbances and student unrest" You're correct, I wouldn't wish to try and prove you wrong when the facts speak for themselves. But what we're 'discussing' here is a completely different argument. On another note, the British Army wouldn't have me at 17, said I had a problem with discipline and I was not suitable material. I'd be considered too old and past it to fight the fight these days, unfortunately... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.