Everyone blaming Islam

Scroll to see replies

How cute that you missed the point

how cute that a school child thinks even 1 islamist attack per annum is acceptable. as long as islam is not blamed right? shows the mindset of the current generation in a spotlight.

Reply 41

Reformed

Original post by alevelstresss

Tunisian revolution constitutes to political instability

tunisian revolution is over Einstein.

what did a past revolution have to do with tunisian french muslims attacking Charlie Ebdo magazine offices out of curiosity?

Reply 42

ManiaMuse

Original post by alevelstresss

Missed the point again lmfao

I see you're getting lots of support for your point of view in this thread...

Reply 43

Josb

Original post by alevelstresss

Islam is not to blame for this, spout out "leftists" or "regressive liberal" all you like but this man acted on hatred and is hiding behind the justification of radical Islam.

Take the cause of this persons actions to the source, and it will not be Islam

Really?

"When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger. "

http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php

Reply 44

the bear

Marine Le Pen has responded to this atrocity:

Communiqués / 15 juillet 2016 / Étiquettes : Terrorisme / Communiqué de Marine Le Pen J’adresse mes condoléances aux familles et proches des victimes de l’attentat qui a frappé Nice. Mon soutien va aussi à toutes celles et ceux, notamment aux enfants, qui, blessés ou épargnés, ont vécu l’horreur et seront durablement marqués. Le 14 juillet, jour de la célébration de notre patrie, de sa liberté, jour de fête pour les Français s’est transformé hier en un jour d’épouvante, d’immense affliction. Nous ne devons voir se succéder les attentats terroristes et compter les morts sans désormais agir. La guerre contre le fléau du fondamentalisme islamiste n’a pas commencé, il est urgent maintenant de la déclarer. Nous l’engagerons vraiment en mettant en place une série de mesures que j’ai déjà détaillées et sur lesquelles j’aurai l’occasion de revenir, qui visent à s’attaquer à la source du phénomène. A la sidération et la compassion doivent désormais s’ajouter l’action, les nécessaires mesures de prévention et de répression, et la détermination la plus totale à éradiquer le fléau du fondamentalisme islamiste. C’est ce jour la volonté profonde du peuple meurtri de France, je mettrai toute mon énergie à ce qu’elle soit entendue et les combats enfin menés.

translation:

Spoiler

Reply 45

QE2

Original post by alevelstresss

Whenever a murder is committed, investigators will look for a motive. It is one of the fundamental factors in determining culpability.

Are you suggesting that in the case of murder by Islamic terrorists, we should ignore the motive?

Why?

Do you really think insulting the religion of 1.5 billion people is the right thing to do?

Pointing out that elements of Islamic ideology is used as motive and justification for such attacks is not "insulting" Islam. Would you accuse the police of insulting a murderer when they examine his motive?

Reply 46

FrogLad

All terrorists are mentally deshevled, no sane person commits such acts. However Islamic ideology acts as a catalyst for these loonies.
I would bet on my life, that if this same person was of any other religion this attack would not have occurred.

Reply 47

VV Cephei A

OP, you have to go back

Reply 48

ZolaCFC25

Original post by Reformed

unlike the colonisation by the islamic armies in the century before you mean?your suggestion this is simply sour grapes after losing a war is simplistic. millions of muslims have left the islamic world in last century to live in the west seeking a better life. actually most of that generation were not problematic. the real problems have been reinstated by the generations of last 30 years. again another tabloid history lesson. the west saved the muslim mujaheddeen from being exterminated by the russians. they also saved muslim extinction in kosovo and bosnia.the 'home grown' islamists can come from all social stratas, from the unemployed wasters to the students with actually the world given to them on a plate. it isnt their background that drives them to make moronic decsions, its the ideology and dogma that has been drip fed into them ( though they seem to be more gullible than normal ) The muslims community seems unwilling to tackle the ideology and dogma from with their own - very few people imams or sheikhs have ever been reported leading to an arrest, hence why intelligence have to be so heavy handed and indeed western forces have travelled thousands of miles to attack islamist headquarters in their own back yard no the fanatics are on the islamist side. they as a by product of their madness though, will encourage support for the far-right which is a problem for all. so the solution against terrorism and spread of far right - is to robustly attack islamist ideology

You seem more intent on attacking a belief rather than the actual threat of terrorism. Religion doesn't commit terrorist attacks, people commit them themselves. Winning the hearts and minds is the only way to prevent terrorism. There was no home-grown terrorist attack before this century... I agree partly with what you are saying but people should be allowed in ghosts or whatever else they want to believe in so long as it doesn't infringe upon others. Extremists need to be tackled, not everyone who believes in something different to you. Your rhetoric seems to be purely 'us against them' and is completely archaic and tribal. There are lots of Muslims on your side... whether you agree with their logic is irrelevant.

Reply 49

QE2

Original post by alevelstresss

But the version of Islam purported bu terrorists is NOT the same to which 1.5 bn Muslims subscribe.

Yes it is. It is just implemented differently.
Or are you claiming that they read a different version of the Quran, different collections of sahih hadith, and different classical tafsir to the majority of Muslims?

You're attacking Islam as a whole, which is bigoted and unnecessary

Islam, like any other ideology, has its good parts and its bad parts. It is not "bigoted" to criticise the bad parts, and in is certainly necessary.

and it will cause more Muslims to feel isolated and develop extremist ideas.

Ah, yes. The new variant of "Kill those who call Islam violent".

Criticise the terrorists who warp Islam and not the billion of peaceful people and / or their peaceful intepretation

Criticise those who carry out and support the attacks.
And criticise the ideology that they use as justification.

An example:
ISIS use captured females for sex.
The Quran permits Muslims to use captured females for sex.
In the sunnah, Muhammad approves of using captured females for sex.
ISIS use the Quran and sunnah as justification for using captive females for sex.

How can you condemn ISIS for using captive females for sex if you cannot condemn the Quran and sunnah for providing them with the justification?

Reply 50

username1044970

Original post by Josb

The verse has been quoted out of context. I didn't expect you to be so disingenuous.

Reply 51

KingBradly

Original post by alevelstresss

You are legitimising this persons actions by differentiating him from murderers through accepting his purported motive, shame on you. Islam did not kill anyone, an angry, hateful man did and he is a murderer. Do you really think insulting the religion of 1.5 billion people is the right thing to do?

Do you value liberalism? If so, stop defending a religion which is diametrically opposed to it.

Reply 52

ZolaCFC25

Original post by KingBradly

Do you value liberalism? If so, stop defending a religion which is diametrically opposed to it.

Strong irony.

Reply 53

JamesN88

You can't paint everyone with the same brush, however pretending a problem doesn't exist to avoid potentially offending people is worse IMO.

Reply 54

Reformed

Original post by ZolaCFC25

No im not getting into the islamic doctrine - im not interested in doing that anymore( even though there is plenty of doctrine i could copy paste to make the point) im taking about the political fallout of islamist doctrine. ppl dont take actions ( such as this ) without a motive and an influnce - islamist ideology provides that influence. it trancsends race, ethnicity nationality social strata etc. if you are guillaible enough to fall for islamist propaganda, anyone can be an islamist terrorist. this why incidence have ben so widespread and pretty much occured in any part of the world where there is a significant islamic population.

Original post by ZolaCFC25

There was no home-grown terrorist attack before this century... I agree partly with what you are saying but people should be allowed in ghosts or whatever else they want to believe in so long as it doesn't infringe upon others. Extremists need to be tackled, not everyone who believes in something different to you. Your rhetoric seems to be purely 'us against them' and is completely archaic and tribal. There are lots of Muslims on your side... whether you agree with their logic is irrelevant.

if you mean this century as in 20th - there wernt any muslims here before 1940s. if you mean last 20 years , there were attacks in france in the 1980s and 1990s actually. but the problem has accelerated unquestionabley in the current generation of muslims- you can partly apportion blame to the internet and the fact the islamsit propaganda we are talking about reaches every guillible mind in that has a net conection in their bedroom. the means of radicalisation has increased - but the source is still the same, and its a source we as a society have not yet challenged. You cans imply take a look at tsr who allow questionable islamsit supporting posts to remain on the Isoc thread- why? because they think they are being politically correct- in fact they are being the opposite by allowing dissemination of extremist and intollerant ideology.A hangover of the late 1990s when our and the US governments supported various islamist groups abroad tacitly - perhaps being ignorant of the effect they would have on our own muslim populations here.

there may well be muslims who are active against islamsit ideology - but they are few and far between and not embraced by wider isalmic community- Quillaim for example are shunned by fellow muslims for what they say. whereas all the pro islamist agendas are heavily financed from gulf arabs and promoted by uk muslim in abundance- hence why they are more susceptible to radicalication in the first place. gain go have a chat to a few young muslims on Isoc. this is an issue the islamic community has never shown the willingness to deal with- hence they produce the problem youth it has. they alligned poltical loyalty more with the shiekhs of pakistan , saudi arabia and palestine than they do with western society purely due to islamic doctrine - that is dangerous. you are clutching at straws by pretending that the 'islamaphobes' are creating an us and them situation - it has already occurred in islamic communities in birmingham, luton, bradford leeds etc - go and see for yousef

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 55

QE2

Original post by alevelstresss

Causes of radicalisation originate from conflict and political unrest. That's why terrorists come from the Middle East or Tunisia, when we have Indonesia which is the highest pop Muslim in the world which has had very few attacks

What about the attackers who come from countries that are not experiencing conflict or political unrest (this must be caused by the country being targeted for the exuse to be legitimate, BTW) yet claim to be acting in support of Muslims?
What about the attackers from UK, USA, France, Denmark, Australia, and yes, Tunisia (the one success story from the Arab Spring)? What radicalised them?

Reply 56

KingBradly

Original post by ZolaCFC25

Strong irony.

Yes, it is an irony which is known as the "paradox of tolerance".

"Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them" - Karl Popper

Reply 57

QE2

Original post by alevelstresss

Nope I didn't because radical Islam is simply the veil that they hide behind. Islam is not the main cause, is there something odd about the stability of Indonesia, india, Morocco, etc, the first of which has the highest Muslim pop in the world and there are very few attacks. Hatred deriving from conflict such as the Tunisian conflict or Middle East conflict radicalised these people, not their loyalty to islam

Not familiar with Jamaah Islamiyah and it's campaign of terrorist attacks in Indonesia then? ("Islamiiyah" means "Islamic" BTW)
Or the many attacks in India by Islamist groups?
Or the Islamist insurgency in Morocco?

Reply 58

QE2

Original post by alevelstresss

So explain why Indonesia has very few attacks despite being the highest Muslim pop in the world

My answer - radicalisation derives from political instability and conflict, not lotalty to Islam

Then, explain why there have been attacks in the UK, US France and Belgium by French, American, British, Belgian and Saudi attackers.

Neither the target country nor the perpetrators' country of origin suffer political instability or conflict.

You haven't really thought this through, have you?

Reply 59

chemting

Original post by alevelstresss

@The Epicurean , you had an interesting post regarding the "stability of Indonesia, India" - countries with high Muslim population, please enlighten my fellow comrade.