This week in Islam

[Mighty AC]

I don't want to show that.

What are you trying to show? It seems to me that your arguments can generally be distilled down to stating 'not all the religious do bad things hence the problem is not the religion.' I agree that the most serious religious problems are limited to the fundamentalists but aren't they just more religious than most? How can we ignore the role of the religion when the most violent acts come from the people who are truest to the scripture? And how do we ignore the fact that, at this point in time, the most violent religion is Islam?

[The_Squid]

Seriously, though, 45 pages ... has the point been made ?

There's something new and exciting happening in Islam every week!!

[Michael Hardner]

What are you trying to show? It seems to me that your arguments can generally be distilled down to stating 'not all the religious do bad things hence the problem is not the religion.'

Sure... but this thread is just examples of the religion being enacted in bad ways...

I felt somehow that ISIS generally wouldn't be part of that, since they hadn't been quoted before but maybe not...

You don't have to "ignore" the religion. But you can't objectively say that it's the "most violent" either...

And after 45 pages, there's not much more to be said or to be proven is there ?

[Argus]

And after 45 pages, there's not much more to be said or to be proven is there ?

And yet, you're still here. So the discussion must hold some interest for you.

[Guest]

Sure... but this thread is just examples of the religion being enacted in bad ways...

I felt somehow that ISIS generally wouldn't be part of that, since they hadn't been quoted before but maybe not...

You don't have to "ignore" the religion. But you can't objectively say that it's the "most violent" either...

And after 45 pages, there's not much more to be said or to be proven is there ?

What about next week?

[eyeball]

...and the West was too afraid.

Yep, chicken-shit through and through.

[WIP]

If the U.S. would get the hell out of Yemen and Saudi Arabia, all of this bullshit about "Islamism" would come to an end! Because right now the Houthi separatist Shia's in eastern Yemen have taken over the presidential palace in the capital - Sanaa, and if the U.S. is really fighting Al Qaeda, all they have to do is stop supporting what's left of the government there.

Same goes for the Saudi's. They have enemies on all sides for a number of reasons: squandering billions of dollars worth of petroleum wealth for decades; oppressing Shia minorities and other minorities in Arabia; and supporting the oppression of Shia's in the Emirates (wouldn't even exist without the Saudis and the U.S.).

So, since as I've mentioned many, many times before - Saudi Arabia is the fountainhead of this brand of Islam that is being taught and promoted throughout the Muslim World. So: Neocons, why are you supporting America's so called "War On Terror," when just like other fake wars...like the war on drugs....it is a sham war that feeds the problem and has no intentions of resolving it!

[overthere]

Saudi Arabia is the fountainhead of this brand of Islam that is being taught and promoted throughout the Muslim World.

It is part of it, for sure. But don't overlook Iran and some of the Gulf States too.

The worm is surely turning on that dynamic though.

US foreign policy is partially shaped by oil, and the outflow of hundreds of billions of $US to that region to buy oil. Those days are numbered. The old alliances are shifting. This must be a profoundly disturbing time for Saudi Arabia, one of the cornerstones of their physical security is slip sliding away.

I suspect the cost of F-35s for Saudi Arabia- already costly- may increase dramatically. For example. How much will it cost the Kingdom to have a US carrier group make a slow lap of the Persian Gulf on their behalf in the future?

[Argus]

If the U.S. would get the hell out of Yemen and Saudi Arabia, all of this bullshit about "Islamism" would come to an end!

Sorry? How would it come to an end, by the Islamists taking over Yemen and Saudi Arabia? And you regard this as a good thing?

[Big Guy]

Our government has just supported an interesting business deal with Saudi Arabia;

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/general-dynamics-canada-wins-10b-deal-with-saudi-arabia-1.2537934

I guess Canada does not want to be left behind the USA. The Americans are busy in the Middle East blowing up the armaments that they created and provided to Iraq and are now in possession of ISIS. They have done a very good job of arming and providing transportation for ISIS. I guess the Canadian governments will allow General Dynamics to build thousands of armoured vehicles to that bastion of democracy in the Middle East - Saudi Arabia.

Since the Saudis finance and support terrorists through that region and the American and Canadian commanders have guaranteed that this current war will take many years, we Canadians will have an opportunity to destroy, and be destroyed by, armaments that we are going to make and sell the Saudis. See you dumb Americans, we can just as stupid as you are. So there!

[-1=e^ipi]

And as I have already explained to you, the current government of Saudi Arabia are actually the MODERATE guys, in comparison to what would take over if we let it. So the only alternatives are to try to moderate them further, or else conquer them and take control of the oil money ourselves.

And how about Raif Badawi or all those females that have attempted to drive despite the law?

The Saudi Arabian government is not moderate, nor is ISIS. This insanity of fighting Saudi Arabia's proxy wars for them (first Assad, then ISIS) has got to stop. The biggest threat to the west is Saudi Arabia, not ISIS, not Russia, not China, not North Korea, not Iran.

Edited January 22, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[drummindiver]

Sure... but this thread is just examples of the religion being enacted in bad ways...

I felt somehow that ISIS generally wouldn't be part of that, since they hadn't been quoted before but maybe not...

You don't have to "ignore" the religion. But you can't objectively say that it's the "most violent" either...

And after 45 pages, there's not much more to be said or to be proven is there ?

You can objectively state that it's the "most violent'

You're right. It's been proven beyond a doubt that Islam is a violent religion. The most violent.

[bush_cheney2004]

..Since the Saudis finance and support terrorists through that region and the American and Canadian commanders have guaranteed that this current war will take many years, we Canadians will have an opportunity to destroy, and be destroyed by, armaments that we are going to make and sell the Saudis. See you dumb Americans, we can just as stupid as you are. So there!

Well, to be fair, the Americans also armed the Canadians. There is nothing special about this as Canada is just like any other nation state with domestic and collective defense needs and defense contractors. Only those who choose to ignore this long history are surprised by current events in the Middle East.

[Shady]

Why would ISIS (The Islamic State) not be part of this?

[Shady]

If the U.S. would get the hell out of Yemen and Saudi Arabia

The U.S. isn't in Yemen or Saudi Arabia. Regardless, that doesn't change the Koran.

[Michael Hardner]

You can objectively state that it's the "most violent'

Objective information is pretty hard to secure for terms like "violence". I can guarantee you that you wouldn't be able to prove it to the satisfaction of everyone here. You *could* prove the number of terrorist killings over a time period, etc., but the more difficult proof is beyond possibility.

[Big Guy]

Shady - Have you read the English version of the Koran?

[Bonam]

The biggest threat to the west is Saudi Arabia, not ISIS, not Russia, not China, not North Korea, not Iran.

Without going in detail as it's off topic in this thread, I would suggest that the greatest threats to "the West" are all internal, not external.

[-1=e^ipi]

Without going in detail as it's off topic in this thread, I would suggest that the greatest threats to "the West" are all internal, not external.

Maybe. But it is hard to disentangle the two. Like home-grown Islamist terrorists are technically an internal threat, but that threat is arguably due to Saudi funding over the years. Alternatively, domestic problems of political correctness and religious apologism result in Western governments making stupid decisions with respect to foreign policy that make the external threat of Islamist terrorism greater.

Edited January 23, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[Michael Hardner]

Without going in detail as it's off topic in this thread, I would suggest that the greatest threats to "the West" are all internal, not external.

Food for thought for the day... I will devote today to addressing these threats in my own life - being healthier, spending less, being more spiritual...

[Argus]

And how about Raif Badawi or all those females that have attempted to drive despite the law?

What about them? There are liberals in every society. But by far the greatest opposition the Saud family faces internally come from hard-line conservatives who believe they are too liberal. If an election were held a real, free and fair election, those hard-line conservatives would be the ones supported by the majority of Saudis.

[-1=e^ipi]

What about them? There are liberals in every society.

I was just pointing out that there are some liberals in Saudi Arabia (maybe 10% of the population or less). Plus nearby countries have much larger liberal populations (Egypt is like 30% liberal).

But by far the greatest opposition the Saud family faces internally come from hard-line conservatives who believe they are too liberal.

I'm not disagreeing that this is the case. I was point out that there are more liberal sections of the population.

But over the past few decades this attitude of 'Saudi government isn't as bad as the hard-line conservatives, therefore we should continuously support Saudi Arabia and overlook their clear human rights issues' has clearly been a disaster because it has resulted in the spread of Wahhabist ideology globally, which has created terrorism in Nigeria, Kenya, Somalia, India, Canada, USA, France, Britain, Space, Australia, etc. We now have a whole generation of Muslims raised in this situation funded by oil money due to Saudi Arabia and the problem will persist for decades at least.

One definition of insanity is that if you keep trying something and getting the same result, you keep trying it while expecting a different result. The relationship between the West and Saudi Arabia needs complete overhaul, and if anything, I'd rather the west be aligned with Shia-majority countries than Sunni-majority counties because the Shia are not the ones spreading Wahhabist ideology and committing all these terrorist attacks (though I don't think we should be allied with Islamist Shia entities such as the government of Iran either, I was just stating a preference given to bad options). Also, the interpretation of how 'Islam will take over the world' is very different in Shia Islam, especially the main branch of Shia Islam, which is twelver Islam. In twelver Islam, the world will not be united until the Mahdi comes, so that means Shia can peacefully wait for the global conquest of Islam. Where as in radical Sunni Islam, the interpretation is that the global conquest of Islam will be done by Sunni Muslims over time, which is why the Sunnis are so much more willing to launch global violent jihad.

If an election were held a real, free and fair election, those hard-line conservatives would be the ones supported by the majority of Saudis.

Yep. Perfect example for why 'rule by majority' doesn't always work.

Edited January 23, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[WIP]

Sorry? How would it come to an end, by the Islamists taking over Yemen and Saudi Arabia? And you regard this as a good thing?

Because this whole thread is an example of taking issues out of context and being completely ignorant of history! Islamists already run Saudi Arabia and Yemen, and will be running these countries regardless of U.S. interference!

The difference could be that, without foreign meddling on behalf of outside oil and strategic interests, the people in this region might actually have governments that represent the interests of the majority of people. What they have now, has been an endless series of corrupt, CIA-sponsored potentates who steal the bulk of their nations' wealth, while being guaranteed continued rulership over their people through U.S. naval and covert forces in the region......up till now! Now things are getting interesting! Because neither side representing the competing interests of Sunnis and Shias, are interested in doing America's bidding anymore.

After hearing all the B.S. about how drone warfare and other immoral and illogical operations were necessary to stop Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, now the U.S. will have to choose between AQAP and the likely Iranian-sponsored Houthi rebels.....looks like everything backfired in a big way because these are people who go in with guns and bags of money, and hire a few local lackies, rather than learn about the nations they attempt to occupy or control. Which maybe a good thing in the long run, because if it wasn't for the hubris of the rulers of empires, they would run everything and never be dislodged from power! And now we may see the clay feet of the Saud Empire exposed. Should make for interesting times.

[Argus]

So ignoring their new punishment for enemies (being burned alive) ISIS has also come out with a guide to womens rights in which it states forthrightly that pedophilia is fine, and that nine year olds are lusty, sexy girls who should be married. All all, Mohammed had a six year old wife, but he decided that it wouldn't be proper to have sex with her until she was nine. I guess we should be thankful they didn't set the age of marriage at six.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/02/06/isis-releases-guide-to-womens-rights-stay-in-your-houses-girls-can-marry-at-nine-education-to-age-of-15/

[WIP]

And since the theme of this thread is: let's throw crap at the wall, and condemn everything Muslim...their religion, governmets, people etc., let's at least note that this Islamic State appears to have violated core Islamic jurisprudence by burning a captive alive -

ISIS Fires Cleric for Opposing Burning Alive of Jordanian Pilot

A Saudi cleric with the Islamic State (IS or ISIS) jihadist group has been removed from his post after objecting to the burning alive of a captured Jordanian pilot, a monitoring group said Friday.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the cleric, known by the nom-de-guerre Abu Musab al-Jazrawi, raised objections during a Thursday meeting to the way pilot Maaz al-Kassasbeh was killed.

"He raised objections during the weekly meeting that takes place between clerics and IS leaders in the Aleppo area," said Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman.

The relevant point of fact in this story is that it clearly disproves the BS that saturates this whole board about that other religion that can't be reasoned with and can only be destroyed! Religions reflect the conditions on the ground! At best, religions can provide a community, a hopeful outlook on the future, and a set of beliefs, practices and rituals which can focus an individual to care about more things in life than his/her own immediate needs and desires.

Considering the times we are living in, any religion can be a benefit/ or cause harm, depending on how well/or how badly, the living conditions are for its followers...and I don't care what religion you're talking about! We have seen the rebirth of warrior christianity, and capitalist christianity dominating mainstream religious life for the past century!

So, what happens now? Well, most of what Obama and America (including little brothers - Canada and England) can do now is to either strengthen ISIS's hand, or back off and let the locals and surrounding nations restore sanity! Whether they win or not, has nothing to do with what is/and what is not in the Quran! I've tried to make that point before, but right now, ISIS has created an issue that...according to the highest religious authorities in Sunni Islam, is unIslamic.....and it doesn't make a damn bit of difference! They'll just hire new clerics who tell them what they want to hear. The silver lin

Egypt's top Muslim authority, the 1,000 year old Al-Azhar university revered by Sunni Muslims around the world, issued a statement expressing "deep anger over the lowly terrorist act" by what it called a "Satanic, terrorist" group.

Egypt's top Muslim authority, the 1,000 year old Al-Azhar university revered by Sunni Muslims around the world, issued a statement expressing "deep anger over the lowly terrorist act" by what it called a "Satanic, terrorist" group.

The Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, Ahmed al-Tayeb, said the killers themselves deserved to be "killed, crucified or to have their limbs amputated."

In Qatar, the International Association of Muslim Scholars, headed by prominent cleric Youssef al-Qaradawi and linked to the Muslim Brotherhood that has influence across the region, called the burning of Kasaesbeh a criminal act.

"The Association asserts that this extremist organisation does not represent Islam in any way and its actions always harm Islam," it said.

The Islamic State posted a religious edict on Twitter, which ruled that it is permissible in Islam to burn an infidel to death.

However, senior clerics across the Islamic world argued that inflicting death by fire was always banned under Islam.

"The Prophet, peace be upon him, advised against burning people with fire," Sheikh Hussein bin Shu'ayb, head of the religious affairs department in southern Yemen, told Reuters in Aden.

Saudi cleric Salman al-Odah wrote on his Twitter account: "Burning is an abominable crime rejected by Islamic law regardless of its causes."

"It is rejected whether it falls on an individual or a group or a people. Only God tortures by fire," he added.

See! Only God tortures by fire.....just like in Christianity!