Can someone explain how the Moslem world gave rise to suicide bombers? Suicide bombers are not solely 100% Moslem clearly but the vast majority are. Dont try the lack of jobs thing as lots of the world lacks jobs but doesnt resort to suicide bombing. Religion? Cant be as many very religious areas of the world dont produce suicide bombers. Ideas anyone?
Are you asking why Muslims use bombs for their acts of martyrdom? Or are you asking why they kill themselves at all?
Or are you asking what drives them to kill themselves in order to inflict pain on others? If so, that depends, but I suspect the main reason is the utter failure of international justice. Maybe you could test it by going back in time in each case to find out what triggered the start (or better yet - the burgeoning) of the practice in each case. For instance 911 was a variant of suicide bombing. What caused it?
I'm a muslim.I can't understand why and how a human being kills himself or herself in such a disgusting way...... I have enough information about islam and I'm sure Islam never approves such a disgusting thing............ First of all Islam doesn't approve suicide...........
ME I appreciate the fact that most moslems are not radical or bombers but but there does seem to be something about the traditions of the faith perhaps that gives rise to suicide bombers. A failure of international justice? Certainly not.
I think it's quite complicated actually as many of the men and women who feel compelled to carry out such attacks are often secular and well educated; and more often than not volunteer and are not recruited. It would seem they are a product of structural, social, and individual interactions, rather than being bound to religious extremism, which often appears to be an implicit American assumption. Many of the attacks that have occured until quite recently (2,000's) have been seen by those participating as coherent campaigns of resistance against a perceived occupier. Lets also not forget that the Kamikazes during WW2; and the Viet Cong sympathizers who exploded themselves amongst U.S. troops also saw themselves as Martyrs; and who can forget the famous pictures of the Buddist Monk who set fire to himself? I personally believe that the actions of Western governments toward the peoples of some other countries, over a long period of time has created an internal struggle within individuals who are actually altruistic; and who feel that their only option is to become a human bomb in order to protect life and country, they act out of desperation as they cannot adequately defend themselves against such forces. Although I personally find the deliberate taking of any human life abhorrent; I think I understand how such a mindset is created....
Katzgar. I also think that the American people are not a million miles apart from the individuals who turn themselves into human bombs to make a point, or to defend themselves against threat, or a perceived occupier. Consider American patriotism; I have yet to meet an American who has not said they would defend their country and/or their loved ones with their life if the need arose. What makes this mindset so different to the mindset of the individuals of whom you make enquiries; the only difference that I can see is that a) the need has not yet arisen; and b) that the methodology would differ. What makes the cause and patriotism of others any less valid I wonder?
They didn't. The modern use of suicide bombings in warfare was popularized by the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) in Sri Lanka. The suicide bomber that attacked our embassy in Turkey wasn't Muslim. He was a Turkish socialist. That said, religion can play a minor role, but isn't a prereq. what a suicide bomber really needs is: a strong sense of altruism; as he / she are quite literally giving their lives for a cause, and just that: a sufficient cause; generally one in which one side is quite out classed militarily. Religion? Cant be as many very religious areas of the world dont produce suicide bombers. Ideas anyone?[/QUOTE]
Increasingly, I get the impression that Muslim fundies and those who defend or apologize for Jihadi homicide bombers don't understand they are defending a bad philosophy. The philosophy of never-ending aggression until Islam dominates all is NOT a good thing. You may try defending it all you wish but it is exactly what you guys decry about the US and Israel. Aggression. Imperialism. Religious oppression of Gays and Women. Bigotry. Enslavement. Torture. You can't whitewash it.
You used this edited quotation out of context to win sympathy for your argument but do you think it's worth being revealed as a rank propagandist, manipulator or liar? He was encapsulating the Arab mindset, not saying that he felt that way.
"Suicide/Homicide" bombings are not an Islamic phenomena. However, the worship of Death as something that is loved by G-d, is an Islamist/Arab phenomena. This peculiar form of hirabah - sinful warfare, is the result of the collapse and termination of the Ottoman Empire. With this first total disintegration of Sunni Islam since the time of Mohammad, every Muslim/ Arab pretender gathered their own factional forces to attempt to create a new, if largely imaginary, "Caliphate." Beginning with the terror campaign of al Saud and the Wahabists, which have since replaced normative Sunni Islam with Wahhabism, every new faction and sect attempted to form a new country or overthrow the existing rulers of any particular country. Thus began the Great Sectarian Muslim Arab Civil War, which has been ongoing these last 100 years. This is an age where every tinpot mullah and secularist dictator proclaims their own Ijtihad; proclaim that they are the arbiters of Islamic Law; and that they can assure their followers of entry into Paradise. As it is an absolute axiom in the Muslim Arab world that if one LOSES to the Enemy (either the Far Enemy or the Near Enemy, which would be other Muslims and Arabs), then G-d (Allah) has turned his face away and the losers are not favored.... However - there is expiation for this disgrace and that it - wait for it... Death! As life tends to be short, nasty, and brutish for much of the Islamic/ Arab world, the promise of Paradise by these musifdun (evil or corrupt persons) murdering others en masse while killing oneself, appears as a legitimate military tactic or religious weapon. Even so, before the 1960's, this method of murder was still considered outside of Sharia and dishonorable, earning oneself a place in Hell. As devoted fanatics and despairing secularists began, in ever increasing numbers, to practice this particular perversion, the petty leaders trying to establish their imaginary Caliphate, saw that they could persuade their deluded followers that this Death Worship was, indeed, legitimate. And thus it is now widespread and, as it always has been, mainly directed against other Muslims and Arabs....
Pregnar, this is a truly naive statement. What you have done here is exactly what many people in the West have a nasty habit of doing; demonstrating an unfounded fear of a Muslim takeover, which is for the most part the product of hysteria. The comparability of this, with the same inane hysteria about 'Red's under the Beds' demonstrated by Americans during the cold war is most amusing. You read a few tracts written by ultra religious extremists, propogandised by the American media and before you know it Muslims are running amok all over the West plotting to take over the world. People accept ideas and solutions with very little evidence, perhaps often with no real evidence at all; and are even being 'presented' with solid evidence in direct conflict with the actual evidence (see 'The Future of the Global Muslim Population: Projections for 2010-2030' - Pew Research Centre on Religion & Public Life') The main problem is, that scaremongering propoganda, false verbiage, hook-lines, cheap emotive innuendo and hyperbole is much more acceptable to many people; as it yanks at specific emotional levers and cynically manipulated inherent racism. It also augments their own belief systems and agendas.
1. You are naive and unaware of the goals of Islam. Or... 2. You are absolutely correct and everything else I've read and seen in the media and on these boards and the internet for more than ten years to the contrary is incorrect. Or... 3. You are posting disinformation to counter the damaging information being presented here which provides a true assessment of the threat from Islam. I'd say #3.
That reminds me of the man whose wife caught him screwing another woman. He calmly got up, got dressed and as wifey was screaming at him he continued denying the obvious, asking her, "who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" We all are losing our willingness to entertain the sweet little Muslim apologist lies while seeing the obvious truth since 2001 unfolding right before our eyes. You are asking us to believe your excuses and ignore what we see on TV and online. It doesn't work like that any more.
You sure managed to type a lot without really saying anything. The global Islamic conspiracy theory is rather tiresome and pathetic honestly. You should turn off Fox News, Rush, and Glenn Beck for a while if you are honestly buying into that crap. It honestly isn't very healthy.
Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth. -- Omar Ahmad, Chairman of CAIR __________ The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. -- Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America __________ These descriptions are very ugly. It is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam, and thats it. -- Turkeys Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. http://dearbornunderground.blogspot.com/2010/09/report-shariah-threat-to-america.html?m=0
Dylith, I take your lack of a quick response to my previous post to mean these quotations have proved your arguments to be nothing but disinformation and lies. I trust it will keep you from spreading those same falsehoods in the future, now that you know that Islamic leaders are indeed carrying out plans to take over America and the world.
Pregnar. I think I can make a pretty good guess at the lack of response; and it has nothing to do with telling lies, or spreading falsehoods. I'm responding, (not because I feel your post has any validity and is worthy of debate, I'm afraid I don't feel it does); because the type of data samples you are projecting as proof are disengenuous and even dangerous in a way. With respect, you appear to have difficulty applying logic and critical analysis toward this particular subject matter; therefore it is important that people out there who have a similar irrational fear of Islam are able to assimilate varied opinions and evidences. Firstly; I'd like to discuss the link you displayed if I may. Dylith was kind enough to give you a little advice suggesting caution in selecting sources of information. I have to agree, as 'The Exercise In Competitive Analysis' you cited cannot be construed as objective; the simple reason being, the paper was headed by Lieutenant General William G Boykin. This gentleman is of rather dubious character, not because he is a Christian Fundementalist per se; but owing to his rather excitable framing of the so called the War on Terror in religious terms; add to this his extreme religious dogmatism, he is hardly a role model for truth and unbiased reporting. Even George W Bush and most of his Administration at the time felt compelled to distance themselves from his bigotry. So this I'm afraid won't do at all. I'd like to ask something of you Pregnar. If you feel so strongly that Islam is trying to dominate the world; using your own logic and critical analysis state your own evidence to support this. I don't mean copying and pasting quotes from a minority of people whose 'personal' opinions serve your purpose nicely (as I could as easily paste a hundred more that do not; but I won't because this exercise is futile) but rock solid evidence to support your theory. Then debate is possible.
As a religious fundamental of the Christian variety I'd say Boykin is a whimsically pertinent choice of knowledgeable individuals to comment on the subject. You don't? Pity that. And, to the casual or lesser informed reader, NotAmused cites George W. Bush's administration's perception of Islam to represent THE STANDARD for accuracy when assessing the threat of Islam to the West. It isn't. Remember, it was someone in the federal government during the W administration who invited Anwar al Awlaki to speak at a government sponsored gathering as an example of Islamic moderation! Casual reader, NotAmused knew this. That's why he brought it up. He was hoping I would fall for his trap and show myself to be under-informed, or he might have hoped I'd accept the myth that GWB was spot-on when identifying the 'dangerous Muslims' in our midsts. Finally, in dealing with your GWB/Boykin example, If Boykin was released or dismissed by the WH for being Politically Incorrect, it wouldn't detract from or say anything negative about his knowledge of Islam. If you can successfully invalidate Boykin on these pages you might also seek to invalidate any damaging statements made by Islamic radicals which I might cite here which happen to be true. On the basis that even a broken clock shows the correct time twice a day, I will use the sources I wish and if you can find fault with what they actually say, go for it. NotAmused is a clever poster. And as for my debating you with one part of my brain tied behind my back, i.e. without being able show my proof, why shouldn't I merely 'win' the entire debate by saying Islam was intended to grow and spread until it became the dominant 'religion' on Earth and true followers of Islam are working to make it so. Want proof? Sorry, not allowed as per your rules. I win.
Also, don't you believe the Chairman of CAIR, the Turkish Prime Minister and the Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America are authoritative? Why on Earth would you want LESS than authoritative statements? Maybe because you find facts and accurate quotations more difficult to spin?
Pregnar. Lets get one thing straight. It appears you read into posts whatever your heart and mind desires. I was not using Bush to represent standards for accuracy for goodness sake; I was pointing out that you had a president in Bush whose faith led him to believe he was “God’s instrument,”who's religion was determining foreign policy. For even Bush and his followers within the Whitehouse to feel the need to distance themselves from Boykin for serious offences; determines quite clearly to any thinking person that his suitability as an unbiased source is without doubt highly questionable. Especially when said source, as a general in the US army during Iraq stated "We in the army of God, in the house of God, kingdom of God have been raised for such a time as this" and "that who we were fighting in Iraq was not a mortal enemy but Satan himself". This assertion was made by Boykin when he was deputy undersecretary of Defense for intelligence. It seems the fact that the US was supposed to be winning hearts and minds in Iraq alluded Boykin. So any report headed by this man whose inherent bigotry penetrated his official governmental position is problematic; and is fully undermined. Why do you think I would want to try to invalidate the quotes you posted, they were made and I have read them myself in the past? Unfortunately they in no way demonstrate that Islam is trying to dominate the world. There is a huge difference between your use of a government official who should be impartial dictating foreign policy; and the words of a few ranting Muslim extremists. They do not represent the mindset of the majority of Muslim people no matter how much you want them to. On the other hand, the likes of Boykin were and are still influential in many quarters. The onus is upon you Pregnar to demonstrate that which you are claiming, so far you have not succeeded in doing so. It is not difficult to provide you with evidence indicating very strongly that Islam is not plotting, nor trying to dominate the world; but unless you give us some specific details regarding this dastardly plot you accuse them of; instead of religious prejudice, rumour, innuendo and cherry picking it can't be done. Pregnar; if the importance of 'winning' is all consuming when contributing to political forums I think perhaps I am wasting my time conversing with you.
NotAmused, I think what we got here is a failure to communicate! Because Islam is meant to be dominant over all other religions on Earth, by any means necessary, at any point in time hundreds of thousands of Muslims around the world are busily working to achieve that goal. It is instructed in the Koran and Hadith. And those instructions means that some who work on achieving the goal will work quietly and behind the scenes but others will be in the limelight and be quite visibly active in their acts of Jihad. Still others will be violent Jihadists and use terrorist tactics to help achieve the goal. But, the overall effect, whether immediate or gradual, will be aggression. This aggression is objectionable, offensive. I don't think any non-Muslims welcome such aggression. That makes Islam a cancer-like entity that threatens to conquer all of us. This makes it a undesireable thing. So, Boykin can be excused his religious orientation. For, what is more evil in his eyes than a religion that commands everyone to submit to it? What is more evil than using terrorism or other violence or intimidation or manipulation or lying or misinformation or obfuscation to help work toward the ultimate goal? Before you try acting superior or even acting as though you are arguing from an equal standpoint as anyone else, I hope you will remember and I hope everyone reading this remembers that you represent an unpopular force that is dedicated to our downfall. That makes you the bad guy. Winning here is not as important as making sure Islam doesn't win. And discussions like this can help people see the truth. And I hope that helps preserve our system and prevents Islam's progression here. I have no issue with any particular Muslims but I don't want to pay a Jizya tax for having the Muslim's protection. I don't want to have to endure publically broadcast calls to prayer from dawn til dusk. And so on and so forth... In other words, I like our system just fine. Oh, and as far as your wanting evidence of my claims here, but NOT wanting me to present evidence in a previous exchange, I think you're in a spin! The commands for global dominance are in the Koran and Hadith. That is my evidence.
I like the observation Sam Harris made regarding suicide bombings, Muslims and radical Islam: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/to-profile-or-not-to-profile
