Steve (as 41oo) wrote:Quote:The articles about Hindu violence are in respose to the prevailing sentiment that Islam is the only religion that currently fosters violence.
I never said Islam is the only violent religion.
Violence often flares up up between Hinduism and Islam. Judaism and Islam. Christianity and Islam. Between different Islamic sects. Between Islam and apostates of Islam.
If you read the links to articles on Hindu violence that I posted, you will find that there has been a great deal of HIndu attacks on Christianity.
Quote: Violence is done to those who transgress Islamic law, and those participating in Islamic ritual. And when 190 Spanish workers and students are slaughtered in Madrid and 1000+ injured, it seems Islamists are responsible.
Hate to break it to you, but ETA are not in the slightest way associated with Islam. Most Basques, are, in fact, Catholic. I am, however, impressed by how ignorant you just showed yourself to be.
hobitbob
...seems like the jury is still out on the Madrid bombing (at the time I write this)....but perhaps you should consider relative to "equality of infamy argument" (a)why we would not be surprised if it was linked with Islamic terrorism (b) why Islamic terrorists might be happy to be cited even if it they were not responsible and (c) why the apparent lack of suicide bombers is evidence against their involvement.
I would not be surprised if this turns out to be AQ, primarily because of Spain's participation in the illegal occupation and rape of Iraq. They have threatened to extend their campaign against any ally of the US. But AQ is not representative of Islam. That is the important point you and the others seem to miss.
Fox News is reporting that a van related to the attack was found with arabic language tapes and Koran verses in. This is just coming in, stay tuned.
(This was TV. No net link yet.)
FOX.
Aren't they the same network that reported the "shocking finds" of the "mobile chemical labs," the "illegal nerve gas sheels," and most recently the "Iraqi Nuclear Missiles (that turned out to be anti-aircraft missles with depleted uranium shells.)?"
When it is reported by a valid news source, let me know.
AS I said on your thread, when a valid news source reports this, then I will take it seriously. FOX is not a valid news-source. It is not my fault you are so gullible.
Okay, are you saying that Islam is "nothing to do with AQ" ? Obviously not...AQ is surely an offshoot of Islam which cynically recruits its "martyrs" with a particular version of "heavenly rewards"....but the problem is that whoever the "good guys" are in Islam they seem to be fighting a loosing battle. If they merely point their fingers at "the West" instead of attempting to put their own house in order then they are no different from any others who evoke external scapegoats.
Quote:But AQ is not representative of Islam.
That's your opinion, not theirs. Al Qaida see themselves very much as representing Islam. They are able to justify slaughtering innocents BECAUSE they see themselves as Allahs jihadists, representing Islam and doing His will.
I write this with tears in my eyes as Celtic play Barcelona at Celtic Park, the fans singing You Will Never Walk Alone with one voice in solidarity with the Spanish
But, the majority of Muslims do not see AQ as representative of themselves. Just like the majority of Americans do not see Bush and his group of criminals (whom you seem to be very close to ideologically) as representative of themselves.
Yes, I am quite the hoti!
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:Quote:But AQ is not representative of Islam.
That's your opinion, not theirs. Al Qaida see themselves very much as representing Islam. They are able to justify slaughtering innocents BECAUSE they see themselves as Allahs jihadists, representing Islam and doing His will.
I write this with tears in my eyes as Celtic play Barcelona at Celtic Park, the fans singing You Will Never Walk Alone with one voice in solidarity with the Spanish
Let me add that to AQ, most of Islam is apostate, and deserving of death. So
any effort to extrapolate the mission or statements of AQ as representative of Islam in gereral displays extremely poor reasoning skills.
Quote:Bush and his group of criminals (whom you seem to be very close to ideologically)
not used my signature line for a while, now lets see where did I leave it oh here it is
I knew there was a reason I only disagree with you on this thread.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:(whom you seem to be very close to ideologically)
Steve, I must admit to only scanning the thread, so I'm not including that part in my agreeing with hotibob! (I only crashed in to stir things up and give breaking news.)
:wink:
Well Hobit lets try a little logic here. I said al Qaida see themselves as representative of Islam. I did not say that the rest of Islam regard aq as representing them, although a worryingly large number do. Now you say al Qaida regard other Muslims as apostate, i.e. not Islamic. Therefore it follows that al Qaida do indeed see themselves as representative of Islam, the rest not being Islamic at all in their eyes.
I think my reasoning skills are working ok. Certainly better than your judge of political preference.
Perhaps an easier to understand analogy might be that of the fundamentalist Christians in the US.They see themselves as the "only real Christians." To them, every one else is an evil "unsaved" individual who is going to hell. Now, given that the fundies are the minority (rather like AQ, whom they share many opinions with), would it be right to assume that they represent the ideology and actions of "Christians" worldwide?
Further, would it be correct to make judgements on "Christianity" as a whole based only upon the stated goals of a vocal minority? This is what you seem to be doing with Islam.
No, its no more logical to assume Christian fundamentalists are representative of the wider Christian community, than it is to assume they cannot be Christian because they disagree with the rest.
I feel sorry for ordinary Muslim people. Most of them live under despotic regimes, oppressed by their own western-supported governments, and further kept down in their aspirations by a religion they were born into, with little chance to break free. What Islam needs is a reformation, a wholesale liberalisation and reappraisal of what it means to be Muslim in the 21st century. But of course Muslims who push for reform tend to end up dead by the hands of the fundamentalists. On top of these burdens, ordinary Muslims who reject extremism are made to feel guilt for the murderous activities of a small minority who act (and there is no getting away from this) in the name of Allah.
I don't think al Qaida represents all Muslims, and I never have. But I do think Islam itself is a backward looking religion, not good for mankind, and belongs in the 14th century not the 21st.
