The "Islamic terrorist" fallacy and apologetics

[Misfit]

What is a terrorist attack but mass murders/crimes committed by a member of a society, which is rare in the given population? Simply labeling it a terrorist attach doesn't make it special. People besides muslims committ violent crimes all the time, if not more. Blacks disproportionately committ crime, as do hispanics, and whites disproportionately committ mass shootings. so there is no issue. it's simply a matter of ideology and media glorification. if you look at the statistics, muslims murder less people. EDIT: Then you have all these kiss ass muslims kissing ass from the islamophobes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W50aNTOY1Yk

historical parallels between today and events leading to holocaust

you also have all these anti muslim hate crimes, what about that?

[Sol]

Terror is about fear as a mean to get something. So any threat is terrorism.
When a police or any other human threats you by a punishment - it's a terrorism too.
Policemen are the most noticable terrorists in a society. Your bosses are second terrorists by a meaning.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Islam is not a race, so I have no idea why ethnicities are being mentioned in a thread about ideology. I believe in the United States at least, the religion of convicted criminals is not recorded by law. I suspect it may not even be legal to do so - I think that may be the case with the census. I know that in the United Kingdom (my own country), the proportion of Muslims in prison is more than three times higher than the share of the general population. But it would be wrong to infer anything from that without further exploration.

If I remember, religious extremism is especially common in societies significantly represented by one religion only, rather than the opposite, which you might expect. It seems in such countries, religious persecution is most severe.

https://www.pewforum.org/2020/11/10/...than-a-decade/

There is no ideology that permits the carrying out of acts it forbids.

Islamic dogma not only does not forbid terrorism, it condones and orders it. Consider for example this passage from the key book of Islam: Quran 8:12-13: '(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes." This is because they defied and disobeyed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever defies and disobeys Allah and His Messenger, then verily, Allah is Severe in punishment.'

If Muslims refrain from carrying out terrorism despite the dogma of their religion, then that is commendable, but it would be better still if they denounced its terrorist elements if they see terrorism as undesirable.

There are a few notable instances of largely Muslim groups being persecuted worldwide which are certainly worth raising, such as the Chinese government's treatment of the Uyghurs, the Myanmar's treatment of the Rohingya, and the Israeli's government treatment of Palestinians. Also the Syrian government's treatment of its own people, which has resulted in more deaths than all the previously mentioned genocides combined, the Turkish government's treatment of the Kurds etc.

But we should recognize all such incidents regardless of the ideology of the victims. If you don't, then how can insist on other people caring?

Also, criticizing an ideology that wishes me to be killed if I do not submit to Islam and then tortured in the afterlife while its followers laugh does not make me Islamophobic. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. I do not have an irrational fear of Islam.

[Aramas]

Terror is about fear as a mean to get something. So any threat is terrorism.
When a police or any other human threats you by a punishment - it's a terrorism too.
Policemen are the most noticable terrorists in a society. Your bosses are second terrorists by a meaning.

Those come second and third. The primary terrorists are parents.

[Misfit]

Islam is not a race, so I have no idea why ethnicities are being mentioned in a thread about ideology. I believe in the United States at least, the religion of convicted criminals is not recorded by law. I suspect it may not even be legal to do so - I think that may be the case with the census. I know that in the United Kingdom (my own country), the proportion of Muslims in prison is more than three times higher than the share of the general population. But it would be wrong to infer anything from that without further exploration.

If I remember, religious extremism is especially common in societies significantly represented by one religion only, rather than the opposite, which you might expect. It seems in such countries, religious persecution is most severe.

https://www.pewforum.org/2020/11/10/...than-a-decade/

There is no ideology that permits the carrying out of acts it forbids.

Islamic dogma not only does not forbid terrorism, it condones and orders it. Consider for example this passage from the key book of Islam: Quran 8:12-13: '(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes." This is because they defied and disobeyed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever defies and disobeys Allah and His Messenger, then verily, Allah is Severe in punishment.'

If Muslims refrain from carrying out terrorism despite the dogma of their religion, then that is commendable, but it would be better still if they denounced its terrorist elements if they see terrorism as undesirable.

There are a few notable instances of largely Muslim groups being persecuted worldwide which are certainly worth raising, such as the Chinese government's treatment of the Uyghurs, the Myanmar's treatment of the Rohingya, and the Israeli's government treatment of Palestinians. Also the Syrian government's treatment of its own people, which has resulted in more deaths than all the previously mentioned genocides combined, the Turkish government's treatment of the Kurds etc.

But we should recognize all such incidents regardless of the ideology of the victims. If you don't, then how can insist on other people caring?

Also, criticizing an ideology that wishes me to be killed if I do not submit to Islam and then tortured in the afterlife while its followers laugh does not make me Islamophobic. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. I do not have an irrational fear of Islam.

your fear at the most beautiful and only right way of life in the world is laughable. and islam does not condone terrorism, islam permits terrorizing the oppressors by fighting those who committ injustice, if anything the US is the terrorist, but for a similar, albeit lacking reason....the invasion of iraq anyone? which resulted in the deaths of millions? the occupation of palestine and kashmir? the coup in egypt? inaction in syria and east turkestan (northwest part of china, where a second holocaust is happening to uighurs and other turkic muslims). us is terrorist by the same token, yet you dont oppose its actions in the muslim world, or the actions of china, or the actions of india, or the actions of israel, or the actions of rape crazy genocidal burma, all of which facilitate terrorists who are FIGHTING BACK albeit in a bad manner. but continue to bark like a dog. your rheotoric will be reduced to the dustbin of history just as the antisemitism is now criminal, islamiphobia will be criminal. islam will prevail.

[Misfit]

Islam is not a race, so I have no idea why ethnicities are being mentioned in a thread about ideology. I believe in the United States at least, the religion of convicted criminals is not recorded by law. I suspect it may not even be legal to do so - I think that may be the case with the census. I know that in the United Kingdom (my own country), the proportion of Muslims in prison is more than three times higher than the share of the general population. But it would be wrong to infer anything from that without further exploration.

If I remember, religious extremism is especially common in societies significantly represented by one religion only, rather than the opposite, which you might expect. It seems in such countries, religious persecution is most severe.

https://www.pewforum.org/2020/11/10/...than-a-decade/

There is no ideology that permits the carrying out of acts it forbids.

Islamic dogma not only does not forbid terrorism, it condones and orders it. Consider for example this passage from the key book of Islam: Quran 8:12-13: '(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes." This is because they defied and disobeyed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever defies and disobeys Allah and His Messenger, then verily, Allah is Severe in punishment.'

If Muslims refrain from carrying out terrorism despite the dogma of their religion, then that is commendable, but it would be better still if they denounced its terrorist elements if they see terrorism as undesirable.

There are a few notable instances of largely Muslim groups being persecuted worldwide which are certainly worth raising, such as the Chinese government's treatment of the Uyghurs, the Myanmar's treatment of the Rohingya, and the Israeli's government treatment of Palestinians. Also the Syrian government's treatment of its own people, which has resulted in more deaths than all the previously mentioned genocides combined, the Turkish government's treatment of the Kurds etc.

But we should recognize all such incidents regardless of the ideology of the victims. If you don't, then how can insist on other people caring?

Also, criticizing an ideology that wishes me to be killed if I do not submit to Islam and then tortured in the afterlife while its followers laugh does not make me Islamophobic. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. I do not have an irrational fear of Islam.

criticizing islam does make youa bigot because your reasons are obvious. you want to ban islam like the chinese communist party wants to ban islam in the uighur genocide. i know genocidal speech when i see it. youre not fooling anyone. IF YOU WANT TO CRITICIZE ISLAM DO SO AS AN ACADEMIC IN ACADEMIC TONES NOT AS SARGON OF FUCKING AKKAD BEING AN ALT RIGHT INSTIGATOR OR DAVID WOOD THE SAME

[Number 9 large]

Islamic dogma not only does not forbid terrorism, it condones and orders it. Consider for example this passage from the key book of Islam: Quran 8:12-13: '(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes." This is because they defied and disobeyed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever defies and disobeys Allah and His Messenger, then verily, Allah is Severe in punishment.'

all this is saying is that god will take care of the unbelievers. how is this any different from christian and judean hell? where does this incite violence?

If Muslims refrain from carrying out terrorism despite the dogma of their religion, then that is commendable

Muslims carry out terrorism because their countries are oppressed by the west (mostly united states atm), the CIA assigning dictators to suppress their own countries for money/power etc. the west has been destabilizing/dividing and conquering the middle east ever since the colonial english started doing it after the fall of the ottoman empire. THIS is why they perform ''terrorist attacks'' which are only a tiny fractions of violence compared to the systemic suppression and oppression of the islamic people in the middle east for decades now. you can compare it to world war 2 resistance fighters sabotaging the nazi war machine, except now its the american/israelian war machine. Please dont talk about stuff you dont even know half about. Of course the western media vilinizes the muslims and only shows them striking back. they mostly dont show all the atrocities the west have been committing in the middle east for decades now. Of course the arabs are gonna try to do something about it.
the israeli practices in palestine are ironically not so different from how the nazis treated the jews themselves. ironic how the victim became the demon. and nobody does anything about it (except ''terrorists'' ofc) because a lot of jews have the power over america to protect themselves with, and the arab states have been weak for a long ass time now. when your country is being taken over by foreigners and your people suppressed (like the nazis did with the europeans in europe 70 years ago) resistance groups are gonna rise. to the nazis those resistance groups could easily have been called ''terrorist organizations' and they probably were called something like that. history is all about perspective and written by the victors. dont ever forget about that.

[SGF]

all this is saying is that god will take care of the unbelievers. how is this any different from christian and judean hell? where does this incite violence?



Muslims carry out terrorism because their countries are oppressed by the west (mostly united states atm), the CIA assigning dictators to suppress their own countries for money/power etc. the west has been destabilizing/dividing and conquering the middle east ever since the colonial english started doing it after the fall of the ottoman empire. THIS is why they perform ''terrorist attacks'' which are only a tiny fractions of violence compared to the systemic suppression and oppression of the islamic people in the middle east for decades now. you can compare it to world war 2 resistance fighters sabotaging the nazi war machine, except now its the american/israelian war machine. Please dont talk about stuff you dont even know half about. Of course the western media vilinizes the muslims and only shows them striking back. they mostly dont show all the atrocities the west have been committing in the middle east for decades now. Of course the arabs are gonna try to do something about it.
the israeli practices in palestine are ironically not so different from how the nazis treated the jews themselves. ironic how the victim became the demon. and nobody does anything about it (except ''terrorists'' ofc) because a lot of jews have the power over america to protect themselves with, and the arab states have been weak for a long ass time now. when your country is being taken over by foreigners and your people suppressed (like the nazis did with the europeans in europe 70 years ago) resistance groups are gonna rise. to the nazis those resistance groups could easily have been called ''terrorist organizations' and they probably were called something like that. history is all about perspective and written by the victors. dont ever forget about that.

true

[Socionics Is A Cult]

all this is saying is that god will take care of the unbelievers. how is this any different from christian and judean hell? where does this incite violence?

I don't care to defend Christianity and Judaism, but the specific verse I quoted actually glorifies acts of terrorism and killing against unbelievers in this realm, not in Hell. The thread is specifically about the notion of the "Islamic terrorist" - I have just pointed out that the central book of Islam glorifies the Islamic terrorist.

Muslims carry out terrorism because their countries are oppressed by the west (mostly united states atm), the CIA assigning dictators to suppress their own countries for money/power etc. the west has been destabilizing/dividing and conquering the middle east ever since the colonial english started doing it after the fall of the ottoman empire. THIS is why they perform ''terrorist attacks'' which are only a tiny fractions of violence compared to the systemic suppression and oppression of the islamic people in the middle east for decades now. you can compare it to world war 2 resistance fighters sabotaging the nazi war machine, except now its the american/israelian war machine. Please dont talk about stuff you dont even know half about. Of course the western media vilinizes the muslims and only shows them striking back. they mostly dont show all the atrocities the west have been committing in the middle east for decades now. Of course the arabs are gonna try to do something about it.
the israeli practices in palestine are ironically not so different from how the nazis treated the jews themselves. ironic how the victim became the demon. and nobody does anything about it (except ''terrorists'' ofc) because a lot of jews have the power over america to protect themselves with, and the arab states have been weak for a long ass time now. when your country is being taken over by foreigners and your people suppressed (like the nazis did with the europeans in europe 70 years ago) resistance groups are gonna rise. to the nazis those resistance groups could easily have been called ''terrorist organizations' and they probably were called something like that. history is all about perspective and written by the victors. dont ever forget about that.

Terrorism is wrong according to international law. If terrorism is acceptable, then you don't need to justify it. You seem unable to criticism ideology, instead preferring to see things in terms of ethnicity.

If you want to talk about historic acts committed by "the West" against Muslims, then I will mention the acts committed by Muslims in their imperial conquests of Arabia, North Africa, the Levant, central and southern Asia, eastern and southern Europe, right from the time Islam was created up to the current day, which persists in terrorist attacks that are inspired by Islamic dogma. The Quran expects the Muslim life to be one of killing and being killed, until the whole world is Muslim. That is the Quran's idea of peace.

"Those who disbelieve [in the Oneness of Allah, and in the Message of Prophet Muhammad ], and hinder (men) from the Path of Allah (Islamic Monotheism), He will render their deeds vain. But those who believe and do righteous good deeds, and believe in that which is sent down to Muhammad , for it is the truth from their Lord, He will expiate from them their sins, and will make good their state. That is because those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord. Thus does Allah set forth their parables for mankind.So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islam), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allah to continue in carrying out Jihad against the disbelievers till they embrace Islam (i.e. are saved from the punishment in the Hell-fire) or at least come under your protection], but if it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost, He will guide them and set right their state." Quran 47:3

"So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." - Quran 9:5

"And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.) - Quran 2:193

"Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." - Quran 2:216

[marooned]

If a terrorist attack is committed in the name of Islam, it can be called that. If a terrorist attack is committed by white supremacists it can be called that. It's fine to refer to things as what they are.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

your fear at the most beautiful and only right way of life in the world is laughable. and islam does not condone terrorism, islam permits terrorizing the oppressors by fighting those who committ injustice, if anything the US is the terrorist, but for a similar, albeit lacking reason....the invasion of iraq anyone? which resulted in the deaths of millions? the occupation of palestine and kashmir? the coup in egypt? inaction in syria and east turkestan (northwest part of china, where a second holocaust is happening to uighurs and other turkic muslims). us is terrorist by the same token, yet you dont oppose its actions in the muslim world, or the actions of china, or the actions of india, or the actions of israel, or the actions of rape crazy genocidal burma, all of which facilitate terrorists who are FIGHTING BACK albeit in a bad manner. but continue to bark like a dog. your rheotoric will be reduced to the dustbin of history just as the antisemitism is now criminal, islamiphobia will be criminal. islam will prevail.

You can only see one "right way of life". This is the mindset of totalitarianism. I cannot see an ideology as beautiful that sees this life as one that must be about strife and which places no value on pleasure except where it serves Islam or Muhammad's sexual appetite.

The invasion of Iraq and the initial occupation of Palestine and Kashmir by the Muslims happened centuries ago. I don't think it's right to keep going on about things that happened so long ago.

I think you see right and wrong exclusively in terms of what is best for Islam, in your view, even if it would lead to inconsistent judgements if the United Nations was to get involved. At what year do you draw a line over claims?

I mentioned other instances of Muslim-majority groups being treated badly around the world, only you have not mentioned them in the above post. I think this may partly be because the perpetrators are notional Muslim. You also have still not acknowledged ongoing atrocities against non-Muslim majority populations.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

criticizing islam does make youa bigot because your reasons are obvious. you want to ban islam like the chinese communist party wants to ban islam in the uighur genocide. i know genocidal speech when i see it. youre not fooling anyone. IF YOU WANT TO CRITICIZE ISLAM DO SO AS AN ACADEMIC IN ACADEMIC TONES NOT AS SARGON OF FUCKING AKKAD BEING AN ALT RIGHT INSTIGATOR OR DAVID WOOD THE SAME

Bigot:

From French bigot (“a sanctimonious person; a religious hypocrite”), from Middle French bigot, from Old French bigot, of uncertain origin. It is often thought to derive from an Old French derogatory term applied to the religious Normans, said to be known for frequently swearing Middle English bi God (“by God”) (compare Old English bī god, Middle High German bī got, Middle Dutch bi gode), which in any case is thought to be the origin of the surname Bigott, Bygott. (Compare the French use of "goddamns" to refer to the English in Joan of Arc's time.) Liberman however thinks this has "too strong a taste of a folk etymological guess invented in retrospect" and prefers Grammont et al.'s theory that it derives from Albigot (“Albigensian heretic”).[1] From meaning someone overly (hypocritically or superstitiously) religious it came to mean someone overly devoted to their own religious opinion, and then to its current sense

I don't want to ban Islam. People can believe what they like in my view. However, I think terrorism and killing people should be illegal, as it limits the freedom of others.

I suggest rather than being so hostile towards me, you'd be better placed trying to find common ground. I for example gave my reasons why I thought Islam condoned terrorism - you could have made an argument against it, but you did not. I also mentioned various atrocities that I disapproved of against Muslims despite not being a Muslim, and I find you hurling abuse at me.

But it probably isn't wise to get into arguments with people on the internet over your religion when you are going through a difficult time.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Regarding Islamic terrorism in recent times, including so-called "suicide-bombings":

I remember in an Adam Curtis documentary he said something like how suicide-bombings by Muslims only really kicked off in the 1980s, as a tool used by the Iranian government. Googling, maybe the 1983 Beirut barracks bombings was the key event.

Before the last few decades, suicide-bombing probably wasn't associated with any one ideology in particular except perhaps the Japanese kamikaze pilots of WW2. Although 9/11 was arguably the big event that played the most significant role. I don't think Muslims as a group are fundamentally different to how they were in the 1970s, it's just that some terrorist organisations are exploiting alienated and/or religiously fanatical Muslims in to carrying out attacks for their agenda. But Islamic dogma having violent material that such organisations use to motivate would-be bombers and militants does not help, nor does material that tells them that life is meant to be a struggle rewarded with great pleasure after they're dead.

[Adam Strange]

Regarding Islamic terrorism in recent times, including so-called "suicide-bombings":

I remember in an Adam Curtis documentary he said something like how suicide-bombings by Muslims only really kicked off in the 1980s, as a tool used by the Iranian government. Googling, maybe the 1983 Beirut barracks bombings was the key event.

Before the last few decades, suicide-bombing probably wasn't associated with any one ideology in particular except perhaps the Japanese kamikaze pilots of WW2. Although 9/11 was arguably the big event that played the most significant role. I don't think Muslims as a group are fundamentally different to how they were in the 1970s, it's just that some terrorist organisations are exploiting alienated and/or religiously fanatical Muslims in to carrying out attacks for their agenda. But Islamic dogma having violent material that such organisations use to motivate would-be bombers and militants does not help, nor does material that tells them that life is meant to be a struggle rewarded with great pleasure after they're dead.

I also think that some of those suicide bombers were tricked into their situations and didn't intend to go to Paradise quite so soon.

[xerx]

I also think that some of those suicide bombers were tricked into their situations and didn't intend to go to Paradise quite so soon.

Some of them did it for the money (to give to their families). At least a few others had down syndrome. :/

[Number 9 large]

Terrorism is wrong according to international law.

ok condemn your own military, because they enact terrorism all over the middle east.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

ok condemn your own military, because they enact terrorism all over the middle east.

If they did engage in terrorism, then I hope to see them prosecuted.

But let's not forget that the vast majority of deaths from terrorism in recent years are happening in so-called Muslim countries and are being carried out mostly by Muslim organisations. To a Muslim, there may be sectarian splits and nuances of ideology, but to the average person in "the West", it just looks like Muslim in-fighting.

In 2017, for which we have data, more than half of terrorists deaths happened in only three countries: Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, and yet I have not seen condemnation of this in this thread aside from a mention of Iraq and blaming my "own military". https://ourworldindata.org/terrorism

[Ave]

If a terrorist attack is committed in the name of Islam, it can be called that. If a terrorist attack is committed by white supremacists it can be called that. It's fine to refer to things as what they are.

I'd like to add to this that a terrorist attack by definition has an ideological or political nature to it, whereas a random massacre or shooting might not have an ideological intent behind it.

The OP is comparing terrorist attacks, that is violence commited with the intent to intimidate and instill fear in order to get certain people to submit to an ideology, or just make certain concessions (like having their governments withdraw troops from a certain area) with a shooting which has no such intent. That doesn't necessarily make the shooting "better" but its nature is different.

[xerx]

Did 'Democracy' invade Iraq? Is 'Democracy' therefore a violent idiology? Is Austria a 'Moderate Democracy' for not joining the coalition of the willing?

[marooned]

@Uncle Ave it's really confusing to me what counts as terrorism or not, and I suspect it's because it's often not entirely clear. Some ppl do seem to think that any mass shooting in US is terrorism, perhaps bc they are so frequent that it's on the avg person's radar (ppl are terrorized). But mb it should only count if it's trying to get at a certain group/demographic of people or be centered around something political, or some larger shared ideology calling for violence... I don't know.

With terrorism committed in the name of Islam, I can see why there should be a distinction that these are acts committed by extremists. Most people of a faith are not extremists. Extremists however can use their faith to justify their violence, they will see it as entangled in why this violence is called for as well.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

For an act to be terrorism, it must involve a conspiracy to commit violence or a threat of violence (i.e. a group effort, a group ideology).

[Misfit]

You can only see one "right way of life". This is the mindset of totalitarianism. I cannot see an ideology as beautiful that sees this life as one that must be about strife and which places no value on pleasure except where it serves Islam or Muhammad's sexual appetite.

The invasion of Iraq and the initial occupation of Palestine and Kashmir by the Muslims happened centuries ago. I don't think it's right to keep going on about things that happened so long ago.

I think you see right and wrong exclusively in terms of what is best for Islam, in your view, even if it would lead to inconsistent judgements if the United Nations was to get involved. At what year do you draw a line over claims?

I mentioned other instances of Muslim-majority groups being treated badly around the world, only you have not mentioned them in the above post. I think this may partly be because the perpetrators are notional Muslim. You also have still not acknowledged ongoing atrocities against non-Muslim majority populations.

I am against any group of people being treated unfairly. whether they be muslim, or non muslim. and i believe in the power of the UN, sadly it does not do enough. the UN should be imposing international crippling sanctions on china, india, israel, and syria and russia and turkey. yes, turkey. im against the ill treatment of christians, kurds and muslim minorities as well. EDIT: dont forget north korea, i would say venezuela, but their economy's bad enough just freeze the assets of government officials.

[Misfit]

Bigot:


I don't want to ban Islam. People can believe what they like in my view. However, I think terrorism and killing people should be illegal, as it limits the freedom of others.

I suggest rather than being so hostile towards me, you'd be better placed trying to find common ground. I for example gave my reasons why I thought Islam condoned terrorism - you could have made an argument against it, but you did not. I also mentioned various atrocities that I disapproved of against Muslims despite not being a Muslim, and I find you hurling abuse at me.

But it probably isn't wise to get into arguments with people on the internet over your religion when you are going through a difficult time.

good, dont ban islam.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

good, dont ban islam.

That depends on what Islam means. It seems to me that you would sooner denounce pornography than terrorism.

[Number 9 large]

If they did engage in terrorism, then I hope to see them prosecuted.

But let's not forget that the vast majority of deaths from terrorism in recent years are happening in so-called Muslim countries and are being carried out mostly by Muslim organisations. To a Muslim, there may be sectarian splits and nuances of ideology, but to the average person in "the West", it just looks like Muslim in-fighting.

In 2017, for which we have data, more than half of terrorists deaths happened in only three countries: Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, and yet I have not seen condemnation of this in this thread aside from a mention of Iraq and blaming my "own military". https://ourworldindata.org/terrorism

Believe what u want bro. All im saying is a passage from the quran doesnt make people wanna suicide bomb themselves. Thats all u gotta know.

Ur like those conservative Delta STs whos blaming school schooting on violent video games or aggressive metal music. You have no knowing of the inner workings of people. You need delta NFs for that, else we get this bullcrap

wE hAvE dAtA tHaT 98% oF sChOoL sHoOtErS wErE wHiTe MaLes, tHeReFoRe BeInG aRoUnD A WhItE mAlE iNcReAsEs YoUr RiSk Of BeInG sHoT bY 85%. get the fuck out.

[Misfit]

You can only see one "right way of life". This is the mindset of totalitarianism. I cannot see an ideology as beautiful that sees this life as one that must be about strife and which places no value on pleasure except where it serves Islam or Muhammad's sexual appetite.

The invasion of Iraq and the initial occupation of Palestine and Kashmir by the Muslims happened centuries ago. I don't think it's right to keep going on about things that happened so long ago.

I think you see right and wrong exclusively in terms of what is best for Islam, in your view, even if it would lead to inconsistent judgements if the United Nations was to get involved. At what year do you draw a line over claims?

I mentioned other instances of Muslim-majority groups being treated badly around the world, only you have not mentioned them in the above post. I think this may partly be because the perpetrators are notional Muslim. You also have still not acknowledged ongoing atrocities against non-Muslim majority populations.

The occupation of Palestine and Kashmir happened around 1947. Mot centuries ago. And if scriptures inspire terrorism......why are there......BUDDHIST EXTREMISTS IN BURMA (and no extremists as far as im aware but i could be wrong, but violence in tibet, but i dont know enough about it) I THOUGHT BUDDHISM WAS PACIFIST NO??????

[marooned]

Any religion can be used for extremism... Sigh... ideology and extremism go hand in hand; religion and ideology go hand in hand... it's just all connected

it doesn't mean any actions need to be taken, though in general it is why i like separation of church/state and secular governments... it tends to better nullify these potentials.

ETA: case in point, US republicans feed the literalist right-wing Christian evangelical crowd by pushing the church as much into the state as they possibly can, and guess what, it fed extremism. Shocker. It really doesn't help the country to have these annoying literalist Christian politicians declaring themselves or one another the next messiah. But they are too selfish apparently to see how they are doing "the great nation" a disservice this way.

[Grendel]

One really bad way to ingratiate a group you self-identify with to the establishment is to accuse said establishment of being "the real terrorists."

[xerx]

The real story is how Islam itself is changing. There is growing atheism throughout the Muslim world, as well as the acceptance of modern secular attitudes towards things like sex.

While it's very difficult to confirm, there are even hints of massive religious upheavals in Iran. People are secretly turning to other belief systems like Christianity, classical Persian religions like Zoroastrianism, spiritualism and mysticism, or abandoning religion altogether. Underground, alcohol-fuelled parties are apparently very popular.

The existence of violent groups like ISIS, who have done everything in their power to appropriate Islam, have, unsurprisingly, helped to carry this trend along.

Personally, I don't blame them. If I was incessantly bombarded by apologetics intended to justify every authoritarian and reactionary mindset, or designed to cement the clemency granted to governmental corruption, I would also look for a way to tear down that system of thought.

[FreelancePoliceman]

The real story is how Islam itself is changing. There is growing atheism throughout the Muslim world, as well as the acceptance of modern secular attitudes towards things like sex.

While it's very difficult to confirm, there are even hints of massive religious upheavals in Iran. People are secretly turning to other belief systems like Christianity, classical Persian religions like Zoroastrianism, spiritualism and mysticism, or abandoning religion altogether. Underground, alcohol-fuelled parties are apparently very popular.

The existence of violent groups like ISIS, who have done everything in their power to appropriate Islam, have, unsurprisingly, helped to carry this trend along.

Personally, I don't blame them. If I was incessantly bombarded by apologetics intended to justify every authoritarian and reactionary mindset, or designed to cement the clemency granted to governmental corruption, I would also look for a way to tear down that system of thought.

In other words, Islam is being neutered by liberalism like Christianity was. At the end of the process to be Muslim will mean nothing and signify nothing other than a half-hearted commitment to an 'Islamic' aesthetic.

[xerx]

In other words, Islam is being neutered by liberalism like Christianity was. At the end of the process to be Muslim will mean nothing and signify nothing other than a half-hearted commitment to an 'Islamic' aesthetic.

That's not the worst observation. Exposure to secular liberalism, through media or otherwise, does likely have a hand to play. The ongoing change, as with all social upheavals, probably isn't solely predicated on resentment towards reactionary or violent authorities.

Who knows how things will actually develop, but the Muslim world really could be a different place in however many decades from now.

[Adam Strange]

The real story is how Islam itself is changing. There is growing atheism throughout the Muslim world, as well as the acceptance of modern secular attitudes towards things like sex.

While it's very difficult to confirm, there are even hints of massive religious upheavals in Iran. People are secretly turning to other belief systems like Christianity, classical Persian religions like Zoroastrianism, spiritualism and mysticism, or abandoning religion altogether. Underground, alcohol-fuelled parties are apparently very popular.

The existence of violent groups like ISIS, who have done everything in their power to appropriate Islam, have, unsurprisingly, helped to carry this trend along.

Personally, I don't blame them. If I was incessantly bombarded by apologetics intended to justify every authoritarian and reactionary mindset, or designed to cement the clemency granted to governmental corruption, I would also look for a way to tear down that system of thought.

If you can't win, change the game.

[xerx]

If anyone's interested, here's an article about the possible changes going on in Iranian society: https://theconversation.com/irans-se...beliefs-145253

Our results reveal dramatic changes in Iranian religiosity, with an increase in secularisation and a diversity of faiths and beliefs. Compared with Iran’s 99.5% census figure, we found that only 40% identified as Muslim.

And people thought that he Middle East couldn't get even more convoluted.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Believe what u want bro. All im saying is a passage from the quran doesnt make people wanna suicide bomb themselves. Thats all u gotta know.

Ur like those conservative Delta STs whos blaming school schooting on violent video games or aggressive metal music. You have no knowing of the inner workings of people. You need delta NFs for that, else we get this bullcrap

wE hAvE dAtA tHaT 98% oF sChOoL sHoOtErS wErE wHiTe MaLes, tHeReFoRe BeInG aRoUnD A WhItE mAlE iNcReAsEs YoUr RiSk Of BeInG sHoT bY 85%. get the fuck out.

I know that the first pillar of Islam glorifies the god and the prophet of the Quran, which condones terrorism. I find that problematic.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

The occupation of Palestine and Kashmir happened around 1947. Mot centuries ago. And if scriptures inspire terrorism......why are there......BUDDHIST EXTREMISTS IN BURMA (and no extremists as far as im aware but i could be wrong, but violence in tibet, but i dont know enough about it) I THOUGHT BUDDHISM WAS PACIFIST NO??????

No, the Arabs (who may or may not have been Muslim at the time) occupied the Levant in the 7th century, and the first Muslim ruler of Kashmir grabbed power in the 14th century.

Why is 1947 significant to you and not 637?

And is religious identity really the only thing of importance to you?

Scriptures that condone terrorism certainly aren't helpful for limiting terrorism.

[leckysupport]

Regarding Islamic terrorism in recent times, including so-called "suicide-bombings":

I remember in an Adam Curtis documentary he said something like how suicide-bombings by Muslims only really kicked off in the 1980s, as a tool used by the Iranian government. Googling, maybe the 1983 Beirut barracks bombings was the key event.

Before the last few decades, suicide-bombing probably wasn't associated with any one ideology in particular except perhaps the Japanese kamikaze pilots of WW2.

Suicide bombings were associated with Tamil Tigers (who are explicitly Maoists) in the 80s.

https://time.com/5575956/sri-lanka-h...lace-invented/

[Number 9 large]

I know that the first pillar of Islam glorifies the god and the prophet of the Quran, which condones terrorism. I find that problematic.

We get it u fear and detest muslims. Now shoo u bigot

[Number 9 large]

Always nice to meet someone who wouldve been a nazi in 1940s Germany

[Socionics Is A Cult]

We get it u fear and detest muslims. Now shoo u bigot

You shouldn't treat "Muslims" as one homogeneous mass who all endorse the first pillar of Islam.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Always nice to meet someone who wouldve been a nazi in 1940s Germany

Even if Nazi ideology wasn't totalitarian fundamentalism I'd utterly disagree with it.