This week in Islam

[cybercoma]

It's really pretty simple. The vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists. But the vast majority of terrorists, at this point in time, are Muslims. I guess the question is why, and what can be done about it?

except you don't care why. I've posted joint studies between CSIS, MI-5, CIA, and other intelligence agencies that discuss the source of the problems and what can be done about it. Yet you, and others, just want to climb on your soapboxes and complain about Muslims.

[Argus]

Terrorist activities are the ones we only seem to care about. If extremism is going on within Saudi's borders and does not affect anyone else... then it does not seem to be a big deal.

Extremism is the birth mother of terrorism.

[Shady]

Terrorist activities are the ones we only seem to care about. If extremism is going on within Saudi's borders and does not affect anyone else... then it does not seem to be a big deal.

Saudi Arabia is just another country in a long line of countries that's fuelled by Islamic extremism. What do you wanna do, invade them and take away all their Korans?

[GostHacked]

Saudi Arabia is just another country in a long line of countries that's fuelled by Islamic extremism. What do you wanna do, invade them and take away all their Korans?

Seems to be how it has been done. But with lies of WMDs and other 'humanitarian' talking points. Only when one of these countries challenges the current world order, they get pounded into the ground. Iraq for one. Libya for another. The subversion in Syria and abroad.

Ever think it could be the West's constant dicking around in these countries that end up producing extremists? Nah, did not think so.

[Argus]

Ever think it could be the West's constant dicking around in these countries that end up producing extremists? Nah, did not think so.

Why not China's constant dicking around with these countries? Why not Russia's? They're both heavily involved in all these places.

Why not these countries constant dicking around in these countries? Afghanistans problem has more to do with the behind the scenes actions of India, Pakistan and Iran than the West. Saudia Arabia and Iran are funding the two sides in Syria far more than the West. Syria and Iran are as much to blame for Lebanon as anyone else. Why do you never blame anyone but the West? And why do you seek to absolve the actual people commiting the actual violence, as if they were ignorant backwards dullards who are putty in the hands of those cunning Westerners?

Edited May 18, 2014 by Argus

[Shady]

Why not China's constant dicking around with these countries? Why not Russia's? They're both heavily involved in all these places.

Why not these countries constant dicking around in these countries? Afghanistans problem has more to do with the behind the scenes actions of India, Pakistan and Iran than the West. Saudia Arabia and Iran are funding the two sides in Syria far more than the West. Syria and Iran are as much to blame for Lebanon as anyone else. Why do you never blame anyone but the West? And why do you seek to absolve the actual people commiting the actual violence, as if they were ignorant backwards dullards who are putty in the hands of those cunning Westerners?

Good points. Not to mention the so-called dicking around that's taken place in Africa and South and Central America. But for some reason, they produce very little in terms of extremism, or terrorism. Hmmm, perhaps Islam has something to do with it.

[GostHacked]

Why not China's constant dicking around with these countries? Why not Russia's? They're both heavily involved in all these places.

That's right these extremists are not just pissed at the West, but also countries like China and Russia. It all needs to stop. But that goes beyond the scope of Islamic extremism, into greater geo-policital issues.

Why not these countries constant dicking around in these countries? Afghanistans problem has more to do with the behind the scenes actions of India, Pakistan and Iran than the West.

Sure, let's talk about Osama Bin Laden and the Muhajedeen , turn Al-Queda. And the CIA helping arm them with help from the Pakistani Intelligence services.

Saudia Arabia and Iran are funding the two sides in Syria far more than the West.

Both sides? I'd be interested to hear that one explained. Yes Saudi Arabia and Iran are helping Syria, along with the Russians. The way I see it it's a nice proxy war between the west and the east all while pitting the different factions of Islam against each other. The smart ones figured it out and I guess are trying to fight back and say gtfo.

Syria and Iran are as much to blame for Lebanon as anyone else.

Right and again going beyond to bigger geo-political things. But it always gets dumbed down to Islamic extremism.

Why do you never blame anyone but the West? And why do you seek to absolve the actual people commiting the actual violence, as if they were ignorant backwards dullards who are putty in the hands of those cunning Westerners?

I have to hold my leaders accountable before I can hold other leaders accountable. I can't do crap about anything until something is done with our own government.

[Michael Hardner]

No, and no again. Perhaps it would be a good idea for you to go back and read the thread, or at least, the first couple of pages. My response has clearly been on the subject of extremism. Violence certainly flows from extremism, but it is the topic of extremism in the Muslim world I have been adressing.

Are you backing away from this now ? You have been 'addressing extremism' by asking questions like this:

"Are they backwaters, often torn apart by war and violence because they're Muslim?"

Have the courage to either stand behind what you're suggesting or to retract it.

No, your analogy was incorrect even if based strictly on violence, but your attempt to isolate violence is a diversion from extremism, which is the real motivation here.

I'm quoting you back to yourself - decide whether you're going to stand by it or retract it.

Again, this is simply a diversion. What influenced Africa in the past, or African Americans, still resonates, but the difference here is that Islam is a continuing presence which guides the values of its adherents far and wide.

So what influenced African still resonates but Islam... uh... still resonates ?

Culture and values guide behavior.

I'm going to pause on this as it seems like you have shifted your argument from what you have said in the past. If it's the culture, and not the religion, and if we know that cultural values change from country to country then how can we say that the religion is a root cause ? As I said, your argument seems to have changed.

[WWWTT]

In Nigeria, Islamic extremists have kidnapped hundreds of school girls.

Apparently some of the girls are being taken into neighboring countries as brides for extremists. Others might end up becoming sex slaves as per Muslim tradition:

I honestly find it infuriating.

Hi Kimmy, do these girls have "names"?

Better yet, where's their families?

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

It's really pretty simple. The vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists. But the vast majority of terrorists, at this point in time, are Muslims. I guess the question is why, and what can be done about it?

Ya no kidding buddy!

The word "terrorism" has been repeatedly used to label Islamic militants.

Oh and by the way, there is no legally binding definition of the word "terrorism"

The good old USA was responsible for more than 500 000 Iraqi deaths due to their 2003 invasion.

Lets up all the deaths and see who the killing machine really is!

WWWTT

[Guest]

So it's okay if one kills only a small amount of people, because someone else has killed a bigger amount, for a different reason.

[WWWTT]

So it's okay if one kills only a small amount of people, because someone else has killed a bigger amount, for a different reason.

Never said that any deaths/murders were a good thing.

I don't like to label people terrorist.

Especially since Mandela was labeled a "terrorist"!

If you want to keep using that word, then that's your problem!

As far as I'm concerned, if the west are going to label groups as "terrorists" then their own actions would classify them as the "biggest" terrorists!

WWWTT

[Guest]

I don't use it often, and only when it's fairly obvious. Most of the time I don't know if it's terrorism or just sectarian violence. When a loaded tool belt takes out a market full of people who believe something slightly different from the coward who brainwashed the wearer, is it terrorism? Or just dead infidels, dead for the sake of it?

[WWWTT]

I don't use it often, and only when it's fairly obvious. Most of the time I don't know if it's terrorism or just sectarian violence. When a loaded tool belt takes out a market full of people who believe something slightly different from the coward who brainwashed the wearer, is it terrorism? Or just dead infidels, dead for the sake of it?

So your not sure about a suicide bomber should be classified as a terrorist. Ok then I understand.

But it clearly appears that you have absolutely no interest in labeling what a violent drone strike killing 20 people is!

And who's the coward in a drone strike?

WWWTT

[Guest]

The same guy who brainwashed the wearer, if it's successful.

[BC_chick]

I don't think Jamaicans or Somalians have a higher prediliction for crime because they have black skin but because they come from cultures and countries where violence is epidemic.

So it's not religion per se, it's culture? Kind of like our neighbours down south?

[WWWTT]

The same guy who brainwashed the wearer, if it's successful.

Ya I'm not wasting anymore time with you!

You are clearly comfortable with western countries killing whomever they feel is inconvenient!

Good luck buddy.

Keep blaming the victim!

WWWTT

[Guest]

You don't have to waste your time with me, but I do feel compelled to remind you that I am wasting my time with you. Someone who thinks that a targeted strike on an enemy with the same or less chance of innocent casualties than a conventional strike is the same as a murderous random bombing of innocent people just for being of a different sect of the same religion.

So don't feel too bad about the timewasting.

[Michael Hardner]

But for some reason, they produce very little in terms of extremism, or terrorism.

You seem to be saying there's been little extremism in Central/So America and Africa ?

[Shady]

You seem to be saying there's been little extremism in Central/So America and Africa ?

Sure. There's a bit of extremism everywhere. It's all relative.

[Michael Hardner]

Sure. There's a bit of extremism everywhere. It's all relative.

Ok. I have been trying to nail down what others on the thread are referring to, and haven't been too successful.

[GostHacked]

Ok. I have been trying to nail down what others on the thread are referring to, and haven't been too successful.

It's only the Islamic extremists that some are concerned with.

[Argus]

Are you backing away from this now ? You have been 'addressing extremism' by asking questions like this:

"Are they backwaters, often torn apart by war and violence because they're Muslim?"

Actually, that is a direct quote of YOURS. I was simply replying to it. My comments, from the first, have been on extremism. You, on the other hand, have persistently attempted to lead the topic off into simple 'violence', probably because you think this will help you, as the great and noble protector of the Muslim world you are, to defend them.

Because they desperately lneed you to do that, Michael. It's clearly your calling in life.

Have the courage to either stand behind what you're suggesting or to retract it.

What would you like me to retract? That violence is endemic in the Muslim world? It's blatantly obvious to everyone and anyone who cares to look that this is the case.

I'm quoting you back to yourself

Actually, you're quoting me quoting you back to yourself.

So what influenced African still resonates but Islam... uh... still resonates ?

In terms of Africa we're speaking history which has shaped the present. In Islam, we're speaking about the present entirely. Not that violence has not always been a deep and integral part of Islam, but the modern interpretations are increasingly more rigid than in the past. The folloers of the religion have not, in other words, noderated, but gotten more extreme, more intollerent, and more violent.

I'm going to pause on this as it seems like you have shifted your argument from what you have said in the past. If it's the culture, and not the religion, and if we know that cultural values change from country to country then how can we say that the religion is a root cause ? As I said, your argument seems to have changed.

No, it hasn't changed a jot. But your tactic of shifting the conversation away from areas you find indefensible (the extremism of the religion towards areas you think you can talk away has simply gone on too long and is boring me. As I've already said, Islam is so much a part of life in the Muslim world that it shapes the cultures into its image. This is not something you wish to deal with because it makes you uncomfortable in your self-appointed role as the noble protector of the Muslim world from unkind words.

[Argus]

Never said that any deaths/murders were a good thing.

I don't like to label people terrorist.

Especially since Mandela was labeled a "terrorist"!

WWWTT

People who get huffy about the word terrorist usually do so because their ideological beliefs seek to justify violence, even against helpless women and children.

It's pretty obvious to most of us that someone who blows up markets full of civilians is a terrorist. Apparently you believe they're simply noble freedom fighters -- even though NONE of them are actually fighting for freedom.

This is the thing you people who refuse to subscribe to any normal version of morality always shy away from. None of the Muslim terrorists, or even 'militants' are fighting for freedom. They don't want freedom. They're very clear about it, too. They want Islamic law, the same law which requires homosexuals be executed, women be kept as chattel, hands be cut off thieves, etc. etc.

[Argus]

So your not sure about a suicide bomber should be classified as a terrorist. Ok then I understand.

But it clearly appears that you have absolutely no interest in labeling what a violent drone strike killing 20 people is!

And who's the coward in a drone strike?

WWWTT

Most of us can see an incredibly obvious difference between targeting people who carry guns and have been killing and bombing others, and blowing up a market full of women and children.

I'm sorry, but I have to honestly admit I have nothing but complete and utter contempt for the snivelling intellectual bankruptcy of that sort of desperate effort at moral equivalence.

Edited May 21, 2014 by Argus