Skip Navigation

Islam and terror

Travel Forums Off Topic Islam and terror

Page 1 ...

Last Post

201. Posted by Peter (Admin 5789 posts) 10y

Quoting wotthefiqh

For Northern Ireland, read Post # 185 in this thread.

Hey, if you can rehash old arguments, why shouldn't I?

The NI post also applies to Serbia, namely that the major impulse was nationalism rather than Christianity v Islam. The Serbs didn't discriminate about killing roman catholic Croats or Slovenes or Macedonians.

I think you may need to revisit that. The slaughter of Albanians and Bosnians was largely because they were muslims.

I can't recall the Pope or the Archbishop of Canterbury exhorting the masses to perform genocide in Rwanda, or do you know something I don't?

The "Ten Hutu Commandments" are a good start. I think you can recognise the religious overtones.

Have a read of this article if you actually care.

In particular, this statement is what I am referring to:

"The language of the "Ten Commandments" was intended to prepare the grounds for genocide in a predominantly "Christian" country. Such articles of faith-cum-instructions reflected an ethnocentric theory made public."

Those Ten Commandments bear a chilling resemblence to another group currently committing genocide in Uganda: The Lord's Resistance Army. Nice name for a bunch of mass-murderers huh?

If you consider extreme Islam a problem, perhaps you should meet extreme Christianity. Then realise that in fact religion is not why either are doing what they do.

Hitler was nationalism on a world scale

Yes, but Hitler too used scriptures to justify his genocide of the Jews.

Finally, I'd like to make the point that to suggest that Islam is to blame for terrorism is not far removed from saying that Christianity is responsible for the tens of thousands dead in Iraq. And I for one would hate for Christianity to be held responsible for that.

202. Posted by Peter (Admin 5789 posts) 10y

This thread has been moved into Off Topic, because it isn't really discussing travel anymore.

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

Got another one, Gangs have their own for of terror and are probably responsible for more deaths a year.

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

Jase, shouldn't that last post be in 'Joke of the Day'?
Gangs primarily attack and kill opposition gang members in turf wars and drug wars,and I haven't heard the NY Mafia, the Ndragheta or the Triads declaring holy war on the West and all it's citizens.
Poor form and PR to kill prospective customers, and it brings the wrath of the Peelers and the legal institutions down on them if law-abiding citizens are caught in gangland crossfire.
Only tossers, or delusional mass-murderers, advertise their presence and criminal intentions.
I do like the imagery though.
Coupla foot soldiers of the Medellin cartel, wearing nosebags of toot, flying a plane into the FBI's Miami headquarters while screaming 'Allahu Escobar'.

205. Posted by Brendan (Respected Member 1824 posts) 10y

I believe there is a misunderstanding, by and large because we are on the same "side". Quite clearly, we all can agree that Holy Jihad is a bad thing. Do you agree wotthefiqh? What myself a few others are trying to do is to have you realise that a Holy Jihad is no worse than any other atrocity. (If in fact the Jihad leads to an atrocity).

No one here is cheering for the extreme Muslims attacks, in the same stride I don't think (m)any are cheering for the extreme Christian attacks, or gang attacks, or the death of a crazy Australian television host. Any affront on peace and life is deplored by most people.

You seem to have a hard-on for Islam though, do you have a personal hate towards something that is no worse or better than any other ideology to scrape across the Earth?

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

No, it wasn't supposed to be a joke it was pointing out that the death or kill rate from gangs is higher than that of the terrorists. And gangs might not be religion specific on their targets, but where in the rule book does it say that terror has to be religion motivated.
I do not condone any form of terror, my point is there are many form of it by many different groups, and their motivation is not always religiously motivated.
Brendan is making a fait point and i agree with most of what he states in his last post.
We all have different opinions, hence the ability to debate it. Goverments are also responsible for acts of terror, but in the name of 'security'.....

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

Quoting Brendan

I believe there is a misunderstanding, by and large because we are on the same "side". Quite clearly, we all can agree that Holy Jihad is a bad thing. Do you agree wotthefiqh? What myself a few others are trying to do is to have you realise that a Holy Jihad is no worse than any other atrocity. (If in fact the Jihad leads to an atrocity).

No one here is cheering for the extreme Muslims attacks, in the same stride I don't think (m)any are cheering for the extreme Christian attacks, or gang attacks, or the death of a crazy Australian television host. Any affront on peace and life is deplored by most people.

You seem to have a hard-on for Islam though, do you have a personal hate towards something that is no worse or better than any other ideology to scrape across the Earth?

Let me get this right.
There are moslem clerics (so-called Men of God), both in the Islamic world and in Western Europe, advocating jihad (holy war as per murder) against my culture, my country, my family and myself, and you reckon I'm being discrimanatory against Islam.
Kanger for sure!!!

208. Posted by Brendan (Respected Member 1824 posts) 10y

There are also anarchists, feminists, communists, bikers, thugs, vegetarians, activists, etcetera that are against your way of life, your family, and your country. Not just Islam.

Let us look at it a bit futher though: Islam is a "religion", more simply it is an ideology. Humans create ideologies; humans give ideologies their power and then use that power to their own means. The Clerics are no different, they are using the power of a symbol to evoke strong emotions through their communities. If there were other, more powerful, symbols to use - they would. My point: It isn't the symbol, it's the people (and I don't mean muslims, I mean people in general).

Perhaps some self examination is in order as well? If there is a group of people that "hate" you, and everyone like you. If that group of people has hated you for the better part of 2000 years, should some inner reflection perhaps be part of the solution?


P.S.
What is a Kanger?

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

D'oh

210. Posted by Isadora (Travel Guru 13926 posts) 10y

It's either short for kangaroo or it's a reference to Stig Kanger and his theories on modal logic and philosophy. Take your pick...

Page 1 ...

Last Post

This thread is closed