Again ...Palestinian terror Hamas fire rocket on Israeli city 'Beersheba'.

Here are Muslims who will explain. http://formermuslimsunited.org/exposing-the-myth-of-moderate-islam/

 

Way too simplistic and too general and the arrow does not hit the center of the target - you leave way too much out and make no attempt to distinguish between an Islamist and a Muslim who is not.

Mark: 2 out of 10.

Cant make sense out of the "used to mislead" part - what do you mean ? It is definitely a person who accepts radical Islamic ideology but the question we are after is "what is this radical ideology" and why is it evil.

An "Islamist" is a person who wants a strict sharia theocracy. An Islamist hates individual liberty and "Secularism - separation of Church and State" They feel they are justified in forcing their religious beliefs on others through physical violence (Law) and/or Jihad.

Not all Muslims are Islamist's Syria for example is a "Secular" Muslim nation - which is why it is one of the few Muslim nations where Christians are allowed to practice their religion and Christian Churches are allowed.

The whole "call to Jihad" in Syria was on the basis of the Islamist's (Al Qaeda/Al Nusra, Islamic Front, ISIS and numerous others of the same extremist ilk) desire to turn Syria into a Strict Sharia theocracy. They HATE secularism.

The ideology of these groups is based on, and inspired by the Saudi Salafi radical ideology. Saudi of course being nut job central.

The fight in Syria is between the moderate Muslims - who like their individual liberty and freedoms under a Secular society - Those fighting for Assad - and the Extremist who want to take those freedoms away.

In Syria there is no Strict Sharia - no stoning of adulterers, no death penalty for gays and apostates .. and so on. There is drinking alcohol and dancing (to the evil western music) in bars. All perfectly legal. Women wear skirts and proper bathing suits. A woman does not need permission from a man to be Educated and can associate with men and others without an male family member escort .. and so on.

The Islamist hate this. They want to take these freedoms away from the people and for Syria to be a strict sharia theocracy.

Why is an Islamist Evil ? They have no respect for individual liberty, the "Golden Rule" and so on. I can go on if this is not enough.

 

Religious groups are clan like and are definitely a social group. And this is certainly a long running war. Blood feuds are characterized by tit for tat reprisals. One side does something bad - the other responds in kind - and thus starts a vicious circle ... back and forth.

This not just a religious war. In fact it is not really a war most days. It has all the hallmarks of a blood feud. It is two social groups living side by side .. who mostly engage in tit for tat actions - rather than all out war - for the most part.

Regardless - why do you have a problem with this terminology. We can dispense with the labels. The bottom line is that both sides do bad things - and justify those bad things on some bad thing the other side did.

 

Not a very good explanation of the difference between moderate Muslims and Islamist's. They essentially write the moderates off as stupid. They do not address the root philosophical reasons why Islamist extremist are evil. They make no attempt - and show no understanding - of the principles of the enlightement thinkers (classical liberalism) and describe - from a broader historical context - why Islam is intrinsically evil.

The article does not teach - it just bashes. There is a difference. The evils within Islam are not restricted to Islam. No proper treatment of the topic (evil in Islam) can be adequately done without contrasting to the principles of good in a broader context . I get into this a bit in post 153.

 

The term is western, speaking of the religion, dividing people into different groups, like moderate and radical.
Implying there is a peaceful side to Islam.
There is no peaceful side to Islam, no mater how you look at it.
Muhammed spent his whole life robbing, raping, and killing, and he is the Perfect man.
According to Islam, you are suppose to emulate him to be a better Muslim.

Not all Muslims want this, and this is probably the ones you are referring to as not Islamist.
However Muslims are under the orders of their clerics, Imans, Mulahs, and the leaders of their country to do as told.
If a leader choses to allow certain things, so be it, he is allowed that, of course the next leader of the day, may revert back to the Qur'an and sunnah.

 

What you are doing is conflating everything in a book (which does have a peaceful side) to individuals that have varied religious beliefs.

Just because the Bible says "If there is anyone in a town that worship other Gods - kill everyone in that town" - does not mean that those all those whose faith is Judaism want to go out and do that stuff.

There are Christians today who want to go back to the "good ol days" of the OT (which what Muhammad's new religion was based on).

Here is Pastor Swanson at a "Kill the Gays" conference a "Republican Presidential political event"- justifying rounding up gays and executing them on the basis of Levitical Law.

Its 12 minutes but you can start at the 2 min mark to get the gist.

I once had a lengthy debate with a Muslim who 1) believed in Sharia Law and 2) claimed there was no compulsion in Islam.

I explained to this person that 1 and 2 contradict.

Islam also has the Golden Rule "treat others as you would be treated/do unto others as you would have done to you" - which is also a contradiction of (1).

Like Christianity and Judaism .... folks often pick and choose stuff that fits into their personal perspective. The wing nut Saudi extremist ideology does not only hate Christians and Jews .. they also hate other Muslims who do not share their particular extremist perspective.

Point being - you are tarring every Muslim with the same brush. There is not a single thing you can tar a Muslim with - on the basis of "The Koran" that can not be tarred to every Christian or Jew using the exact same logic.

This is why it is important to be specific. The term Islamist - is very specific. By definition this person is a hateful piece of human garbage that has no respect for the individual liberty or freedom of others - and wants to force his religious belief on others through physical violence (Law).

There is a difference between 1) having a personal religious belief and 2) forcing that belief on others though physical violence (law) or Jihad.

LAW - by definition - is giving the Gov't power to force behavior on others through physical violence. The power to punish ( the "heavy hand of the State") This was the connection the Muslim was not getting at first.

When you favor law based on religious belief - you then favor forcing your religious belief on others through physical violence.

If you do not like alcohol .. great - don't drink. When you want to force others not to drink alcohol - that requires a completely different justification.

The question of a referendum- say on alcohol- is not "do you like alcohol". The question of a referendum is "Do you have sufficient justification to force others not to drink through physical violence"

"God Says So" is not legitimate justification. Prove that "God says so". Prove that the Koran is "God's word" - or any other religious text.
Like all religious texts .. they prove themselves to be not "Gods word" by the many contradictions. Unless of course one believes God is an idiot - a flip flopping walking contradiction.

"I don't like alcohol" is not a legitimate justification. If you don't like it - don't drink. There is a difference between having a belief and forcing that belief on others through physical violence (Law).

Either you get this distinction or you do not. Anyone who does not is a piece of human garbage. Islamist's do not get this distinction.

The Golden Rule - If you do not want others forcing their religious or personal beliefs on you through physical violence - Do not do this to others.

How tough is that to understand ? Obviously it is quite complicated since so few understand this rule. 12 years of school and we manage not to teach this rule.

Why is this rule important ? Hamurrabi had this rule in is law code (1800 BC) .. and various other Law codes that date way way back.
Buddha had this rule. Confucius had this rule.

Jesus (Matt 7:12) stated that this rule is the rock on which his teachings are based. "The rule that sums up the law and the prophets".
The most famous Jewish Rabii just before the time of Jesus said the same.

The Koran has this rule.

Classical liberalism, Republicanism and the principles on which this nation is founded in this rule - as per the "Social Contract" which is the construct by which Gov't gets authority from "we the people".

The Islamist rejects all these principles of good. The Islamist rejoices in Evil. Not every Muslim is an Islamist (unfortunately a whole lot of them are - the majority in fact)

Running out to the street corner and saying "The Koran is evil and everyone who is a Muslim is evil" is a statement of nothing. It is a fallacious assumed premise. It does not explain "why".

It is not the Koran that goes out and does evil and believes evil things. It is the Islamist .. and anyone who believes in Sharia Law (probably 80% or more of Muslims) are Islamist's

Many of these Islamist's are not radical Islamist's they do not pick up the gun and go out to Holy War. This does mean these people are not human garbage... they are ... condoning evil is just as evil as the evil act itself. Condoning evil ideology is Evil.

The evil ideology is not the Koran as a whole there are many things that are not Evil in the Koran. The evil ideology is - The Evil Ideology.

You focus on the Koran but, you are not focusing on the Evil Ideology in its broad context.

1) Hatred for individual liberty
2) Forcing Religious beliefs on others through physical violence (Law) Sharia Law in this case
3) Hatred of the Golden Rule.

There was a thread about some Islamist nut job in England just being let out of Jail. The guy says he does not respect English law but only the law of the Caliphate or some such gibberish.

The principle on which this nation (and Western society in general) was founded is respect for individual liberty. Why the fk would we let someone into this nation (or those folks in other Western nations) that has no respect for individual liberty ?? That hates the principles on which this nation was founded. They come here claiming persecution - for our freedoms yet .. they hate those freedoms and their life goal is to take those freedoms away ?

Yet we do. Some woman in a Hijab. What do you want me to tell you. That is a big flashing neon sign which states "I hate individual liberty" - by definition. Why would we let such a person in to this nation ? or her husband standing there smiling - the guy who forced her to dress up in a Halloween costume 365 days a year.

 

Hmmmmm


And what book would that be.

 

Right ISIS are not radicals, nor Islamists. They are marelly good Muslims.

 

And in this case the Jews thieved it from Muslims by ethnically cleansing them to Gaza. All in order to thieve their properties.
Crime should never pay.

 

LOLOL

Jews were around long before Muslim were. The Jews have thousands of years history there.

 

That's correct, they are people following the orders written in their religion.

"Good Muslims", are very evil people.

 

I haven't proved your claim to be false or true? WTF? lol
I proved my claim. It's up to you to debunk it. So far you haven't.

 

Irrelevant. The Jews still ethnic cleansed and thieved the belongings of those Muslims. It's the Jews who send them to their open air prison / Gaza. The bill is being presented from Gaza. They don't got any grounds to complain about the bill. They can always go back where they came from and let the rightful owners come back.

 

How can you call it irrelevant.
The Muslims went on a rampage, stealing all the land of the Jews.
Christians got them also, but the muslims won over all, taking their land.
How is that irrelevant.
Are we using a double standard here.

If it is OK to own land by force, then the Jews own Israel.
If it is not OK to take land by force, Then the Jews own, from the Nile to the Euphrates.

 

Sloppy use of words and their meanings leads to sloppy thinking. The international terrorism coming from Muslims is not a 'blood feud' yet you stubbornly insist on continuing with the term. You may have your own reasons.

 

As many an Imam will tell you there is no such thing as a 'moderate Muslim'. What does that even mean?

If there are any positive philosophies in Islam that does't exist elsewhere I'd be happy to hear them. Otherwise it appears to be the most evil major movement on the planet, encouraging violence and discrimination everywhere.

 

How can Jews steal the land from Muslims if the Jews, and Christians, were there before the Muslims?

 

Something we see is everyone, including our own government, trying to find excuses why Muslims do what they do, without looking at the religion.
They did it because of this.
They did it because of that.

I would like to see scholars from both sides, on a televised discussion, regarding the tenants of Islam.

This will not happen, and anything they can do to keep it from happening, is the intentions of all.

We have too much money involved, and to condemn one group, or country, for its behavior, based on Islamic teachings,
opens the door to condemn our supposed friends.


Maybe the horsesh-t going on in Saudi Arabia will turn the tide.
The public needs to be made aware of the Islamic religion.

 

I think all Muslims are moderate, until they are caught.

 

I would be really interested in hearing those also.

 

Israel did not win the war in 1967 against the Paleshtinos .
They won against Jordan.
Jordan owned the land !
Palesht-inians did not want or talk about a state perior to 1967.
Jordan is Palestine !

 

How is that even possible if the Christians and Jews were there first? They can only reclaim what was rightfully their's in the first place.

 

Me too but there'll never be a response. I've asked that same question numerous times and even the hard core Muslims stay silent..

 

Just like the Muslims are reclaiming Europe that the Christians have stolen.

 

That was nothing to do with Islam, it was owing to the scientists and geniuses of the time. Religion has given the world nothing except bloodshed and strife.