Skip Navigation

Islam and terror

Travel Forums Off Topic Islam and terror

Page 1 ... ...

Last Post

131. Posted by Jase007 (Travel Guru 8870 posts) 10y

Quoting Belize Me

Quoting Guinness

And everyone has terrorised something in their life, be it an ant, tree or person.

Perhaps, but the question is, did they do it willingly and with malice? Big difference.

The point I was trying to put across is:
Is the question put was Islam and terror? the answer is no, it's Man and Terror
It's man not religeon that commits terror.

132. Posted by Belize Me (Full Member 137 posts) 10y

Quoting Guinness

It's man not religeon that commits terror.

I don't like getting into negative discussions about religion, so I'm trying to keep this post very generic. I'm not targetting anyone or any religion so please, don't be throwing cow patties at me.

Having said that, I disagree. If the 'head' of a religion stands in front of his congregation shouting at them to 'kill in the name of whomever their deity is', and his followers go out and follow his instructions, then the religion is at fault. Religious leaders are a religion imo. If other members of that religion don't believe that what their chief is doing is correct, then the chief should be ousted. Obviously a religion cannot carry a bomb in the literal sense, but it is indeed responsible for the acts of its leaders/followers.

[ Edit: Fixed quote ]

133. Posted by Jase007 (Travel Guru 8870 posts) 10y

So, lets get it clear here:
You are saying that because of what a few extreamists (who maybe at the higher levels) say the whole membership of a religion is responsible.

But the head of a religion, isn't the religion, they represent it, but then again so do the followers. It's just like a dictator may or may not represent the views of the country the are in control of.

Just because the leader of a country or religion says something, that does not necessary tar the whole population with the same brush.

History is littered with extreamist leaders of all faiths and countries who have been responsible for a whole catalogue of attrocities, but in many cases the majority of the population wouldn't have had a clue what was going on or had the means to prevent it.

Ultimate power corrupts ultimately - hence I will reitterate that it's the man/woman hiding behind the veil of the religion that is responsible.
I'm an atheist and would quite happily confiscate all religious wealth and distribute it to the needy, but some people need something to believe in, and thats their choice.

134. Posted by Belize Me (Full Member 137 posts) 10y

Quoting Guinness

So, lets get it clear here:
You are saying that because of what a few extreamists (who maybe at the higher levels) say the whole membership of a religion is responsible.

Yes, imo the whole membership is responsible for making things right. If they agree with the basic (good) principles of their religion but do not agree with one or two extremist 'bad leaders', it should be up to the membership to remove the offensive parties. No one else can do it. It would be the same as getting rid of the leader of a country that is leading the country in the wrong direction.

But the head of a religion, isn't the religion, they represent it, but then again so do the followers.

Bingo....and if those followers are seen as sympathizers of the extremist leader, they WILL be tarred with the same brush by the rest of the world. If the followers can show that they are trying to do something about the extremists, they themselves would gain sympathy from the rest of the world.

Just because the leader of a country or religion says something, that does not necessary tar the whole population with the same brush.

It does if they are all in agreement about the religious practices.

History is littered with extreamist leaders of all faiths and countries who have been responsible for a whole catalogue of attrocities, but in many cases the majority of the population wouldn't have had a clue what was going on or had the means to prevent it.

We're living in a different time now. With 'breaking news' on the homefront as well as foreign broadcasts, almost everyone can see what their neighbours are up to. There is always a way to change things if you really want change badly enough.

Ultimate power corrupts ultimately - hence I will reitterate that it's the man/woman hiding behind the veil of the religion that is responsible.

I could not have said it better myself! Come out from behind the veil (not you! ;)) and stand up for what you say you believe in and what you want the world to believe about your religion.

I'm an atheist and would quite happily confiscate all religious wealth and distribute it to the needy, but some people need something to believe in, and thats their choice.

I believe you are correct but I think everyone needs something to believe in (not just some) but it may not be religion. Many just need to believe in themselves.

Since you brought up the point that you are an atheist, may I ask what it is exactly that an atheist does or does not believe in? I have never had the opportunity to ask that question before and I'm really interested in knowing. If you find the question offensive, you have my apology up front. I don't want to put you on the spot.

Take care and happy travels.
Belize Me (I'm the longform)

135. Posted by Jase007 (Travel Guru 8870 posts) 10y

Quoting Belize Me

I believe you are correct but I think everyone needs something to believe in (not just some) but it may not be religion. Many just need to believe in themselves.
Since you brought up the point that you are an atheist, may I ask what it is exactly that an atheist does or does not believe in? I have never had the opportunity to ask that question before and I'm really interested in knowing. If you find the question offensive, you have my apology up front. I don't want to put you on the spot.
Take care and happy travels.
Belize Me (I'm the longform)

Hi there,
No offense taken (takes a hell of a lot to offend me :))well i'm glad to see that we have an understanding.
As for being an atheist, well the dictionary define one as:
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

So, we have another agreement of sorts, I don't believe in organised religion on anything like that. Just the fact that you believe in yourself, and respect you and those around you. I don't need anyone to tell me when i'm doing right or wrong in someone elses opinion(the goverment tells me that more than enough).

Have a good one

136. Posted by mally (Respected Member 199 posts) 10y

this is a warped subject . in the past muslim kings have been married to jews. in the past they have produced offsprings. this thing so called god fearing people have don't have any god in their hearts as it is said that only god has the right to punnish. god gave us all indevidual free thought when we were thrown out of the garden of eden. we have been trying ever since to return. Ha! Ha!
if these people were beilievrs in god they would except every ones different views point.
these people have only violence left to make them feel important . to copy a child stupidity into being a suiside bomber is unbelievable. life is for living. you are here now and if there is an after life please find me i'm waiting. i'll write about it .
put 1.000 different small children together and they will play together.. if women have to be beaten and dressed so you can't tell them apart let the men do the same frocks and all. or better still let women have several husbands.

137. Posted by wotthefiqh (Inactive 1447 posts) 10y

I have added 3 posts to this thread.
My first, back in Nov 2005, included a number of reasons why I could only view the conservative Islamic world as a medieval,
religious tyranny, akin to the Christian church back in the 15 or 1600's.

Member Cikusang's reply included 'this thread has been "monitored" by many viewers from all around the world', plus "bear in
mind that words could be killing' and 'Do you know how your statement may have arouse the dissatisfactory among some of the
Islamic believers here perhaps?'.

My reply to Cikusang was 'Your post November 6th 2005 in response to my personal opinion on Islam could easily induce paranoia. My posts are being 'monitored'? By who? A group of jihadis (holy warriors of Islam) adding my personal details to a database of 'Enemies Of Islam'? Actually, that wouldn't surprise me in the least.
You failed to give any response to my examples of Islamic inspired murder or any reasoned rebuttal of my opinion of Islam,
but instead mentioned 'anger among moslem believers who frequent TP'. Was that a warning that moslem fanatics may wish me
violence, and therefore I should keep my opinions about Islam to myself? Your assertion that 'words kill' is a nonsense. The REACTION to words kill, and that seems to be the only response the
Islamic world ever makes to a supposed insult, criticism, calls for reform or holding to account for Islam's violent
medievalism.'.
Cikusang never replied which comes as no great surprise.

Applegirl had a go at me, accusing me of being a BIGOT because of my second post, but naturally couldn't rebut my opinion with any rational counterpoints of her own.
Par for the course. If you have no logical answer, go for the racist, xenophobist, bigoted gambit.

The conservative Islamic world (from the Atlantic coast of Morocco to the Pakistan/India border and probably beyond) is really ruled by the moslem cleric (mullah/imam/ayatollah), and the moslem faithful have no say whatsoever in their present nor their future. The so-called men of God will intimidate, brutalise and murder to maintain their hold over the Ummah (moslem community).
Communism had it's commissars, Islam has it's clerics.

Examples -

In July 2003 Afghanistan's Supreme Court issued the death penalty for blasphemy to the editor of a Kabul newspaper for asking in an editorial the question ‘Why, after 1,400 years of Islam, is there no sign of progress or development in Muslim society?’.
In 2000 liberal Iranian shia cleric Hassan Yousefi-Eshkavari was arrested for apostasy and sentenced to death. His crime was
to recommend that the wearing of the veil should be optional and that all Islamic principles related to social issues be
reviewed and brought into line with modern society.
They will even kill their own!!!!
Irshad Manji, Canadian lesbian Moslem writer, wrote a book called ‘The Trouble With Islam’, and a number of moslem clerics
have issued fatwas (religious rulings) calling for her murder.
Iranian ayatollahs regularly incite the faithful to demonstrate in the streets after Friday prayer, screaming ‘Death to America, Death to the Great Satan’, and this has been going on for 25 years.

I first became aware of the direct link between Islam and Terrorism more than 25 years ago.
In 1989 the Ayatollah Khomeini issued his notorious "fatwa" (A FATWA is a legal opinion or ruling issued by an Islamic scholar) against Salman Rushdie. This fatwa was a murder contract placed upon Rushdie's head for writing a book, The Satanic Verses, that allegedly "insulted" Islam. Rushdie was also branded a apostate since he had once been a Moslem.
Thwe fatwa said: "I inform the proud Muslim people of the world that the author of the Satanic Verses book, which is against Islam, the Prophet and the Koran, and all those involved in its publication who are aware of its content are sentenced to
death".
What can be more terrible than knowing that a spiritual? religious leader has just given 1.2 billion of the faithful the sanctity to extinguish your existence from this world, and Khomeini never even read the book by all accounts.
Still, how could be read a book which reportedly insulted Islam? Talk about Catch 22!!!
Hitoshi Igarashi, translator of The Satanic Verses into Japanese, was stabbed to death in 1991. Knife attacks were made on two other Rushdie translators, Ettore Capriolo for the Italian edition and William Nygaard for the Norwegian one, seriously wounded them.
Your average jack-the-lad Iranian ayatollah makes Tomás de Torquemada (yes, he of the Spanish Inquisition) look like a 21st
century Swedish social democrat.
Voltaire is supposed to have said 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say
it'. The veracity of whether he said this or not is in dispute, but I agree with the statement without reservation.
The mullahs say categorically 'I do not agree with what you have to say, and I will intimidate, threaten violence and issue
fatwas for your murder because of what you have said'.
Now every two-bit moslem cleric issues death fatwas, safe in the knowlege that the West will ignore it at best or release some gutless press release admonishing the deed.
It has almost become de rigeur that moslem piety is in direct proportion to the virulence of the hatred expressed against the
Infidel West and the eloquence of the Koranic passages supporting the call to jihad (holy war).
Some posts have mentioned the crusades, the use of atom bombs in 1945, Vietnam and other such nonsense to justify their
disgust at America and their belief that Western democracy is the cause of the moslem world's grinding poverty and tyranny.
What a load of Beaulocks!!!
If poverty causes terrorism, where are the peons of Mexico City, the residents of Rio's favelas or the destitute of Zimbabwe?
Flying planes into America's high-rise buildings? Bombing the London Underground?
Are Japanese Banzai pilots massacrying US serviceman in Japan or Okinawa because they lost the war?
The primary cause of Islamic terrorism is the battle between 21st century reality (globalisation, diversity, tolerance of race and faith) and the Salafist's murderous urge to divorce Islam from humanity and return to the 7th century when the Word,
the Message and the Community lived by Allah's decree, and weren't those times a bundle of laughs!!
It ain't gonna happen, but a lot of people are going to die because of it, and the vast majority will be moslem, because this
is primarily a war between the traditionalists and the modernisers.
The West, and the US in particular, is a much a beacon of freedom from the tyranny of the mullah as it was from the tyranny
of Nazism or Communism.
Extremely flawed, prone to the most crass mistakes any human can make, but sure beats the ordure out of any perfect Islamic
state (Saudi, Iran, Sudan and the filthy Taliban of Afghanistan).

As I have tried to give some cogent comment (free to any intelligent counter you may make) about Islam and Terrorism, could
the next poster please not add some gratuitous nonsense about 'Islam is a religion' or 'Man and Terror not Islam and Terror' or 'Only a few extremists are involved'. How many Shiite clerical extremists are there in Iran, Lebanon or France? One
helluva lot at the last count.
Any by the way,Islam is not a religion.
It is a template for the total and brutally coercive organization of society, encompassing laws for birth, death, marriage, divorce,
inheritance, commerce, dress, diet, prayer, war, relations between the sexes, etc.

May the one and only Mother Goddess protect us all.

P.S, Check out Irshad Manji's homesite http://www.muslim-refusenik.com/, then post in this thread how it might feel to be under a death fatwaa.

138. Posted by beerman (Respected Member 1631 posts) 10y

Cobbana, speak your mind. That's about all anyone can do when dealing with extremists.

It is my personal belief (not general all around fact) that religious leaders foster the hatred that we see all around the world today (sure, not all of them, but some). The Holy books that are read as gospel (excuse the pun) were written many, many hundreds of years ago, after having been passed down as spoken stories. Anyone ever play the telephone game? The story is rarely told the same way twice. Were these gospels written for future generations? No, they were written for the masses at the time, most of whom wiped their asses with papyrus. I think times have changed a bit....though perhaps not.

I find it amusing that some muslims call for the deaths of "infidels". What the hell is an infidel? There are far fewer christians calling for the deaths of others (excluding Pat Robertson, who is certifiably insane). Not too many jews calling for death. Buddhists? No, no death calls there. Who am I missing?

Perhaps a good Holy War would be good for the planet. Certainly cut down on the population...fewer mouths to feed, plenty of fertilizer (in rotting corpses), less pollution....let the best God win. No nuclear weapons, no guns, just hand to hand combat amongst the pious. C'mon gang, who's with me? Wholesale slaughter, here we come!!!!

Oh, wait....I'm an infidel. Crap.

139. Posted by wotthefiqh (Inactive 1447 posts) 10y

Beerman,
I just spoke my mind, and it was an honest opinion, not a call to murder which medieval Islam, and the craven faithful, seem to have as the only response to being held to account for their religious/cultural brutality.
You might enjoy being a dhimmi, but this little duckie won't accept the beaulocks that western democratic culture is responsible for Islam's own misery.
Blame Al-Ghalazi, Ibn-Tamiyya, the Saudi Wahhabist purists, Syyed Qutb, but I accept no responsibility whatsoever.

140. Posted by beerman (Respected Member 1631 posts) 10y

Quoting cobbana

Beerman,
You might enjoy being a dhimmi, but this little duckie won't accept the beaulocks that western democratic culture is responsible for Islam's own misery.

OK, I give. What's a dhimmi?

And I agree with you. Societies and cultures, for the most part, are responsible for their own miseries and problems. I would say notable exceptions would be Bosnia, Rwanda, and Darfur.

Nonetheless, it is a growing societal (and global) phenomenon to blame others for your own problems (on a personal or group level). Here in the US, it seems that every little medical malady needs a name, therefore making it a disease and not the fault of the individual..

Patient: Doctor, my ass hurts
Doctor: Well, you must have sore cheek syndrome. Do you sit much?
Patient: Why yes, all the time.
Doctor: Well, it's not your fault. Take this new prescription drug, and eat these fried greaseballs and you'll be fine.

My point is, too many people have been raised in the last 30 years in cultures that tell them that they are not too blame for their actions. Why would religions be excepted from this theory?

I don't think any religion is inherently evil. The books were written for a different era. The people that espouse returning to an era af savagery and ignorance are the problems. And they cross all spectra of faith.

I know there is more to this...but the boss is on the intercom...

Page 1 ... ...

Last Post

This thread is closed