Two explosions at Brussels Airport, several injured

People will lump all people of North African and Middle Eastern appearance together and call them Muslims

Far too presumptuous. Unless you have evidence to suggest your statement is fact, you're causing more harm than good.

You are the one doing harm - you are marginalising Muslims

Spread love, not hate!

Love trumps hate!

You are the one doing harm - you are marginalising Muslims

Spread love, not hate!

Love trumps hate!

Far too presumptuous.

Keep it up with the assumptions!

So you agree that Muslims and those of Arab appearance should not be racially profiled?

I'm glad

So you agree that Muslims and those of Arab appearance should not be racially profiled?

I'm glad

So when you said that 1.5 billion Muslims are responsible for the acts of terror committed by ISIS, you were just 'criticising the religion'? When you said Muslims should 'get off their arses and go and fight ISIS' you were just criticising the Islamic faith? Sure.

You are insulting the followers of Islam, when they had nothing to do with, and had no connection to the terrorist attacks that occurred. It's just that the people who did them happen to follow a very extremist version of the religion, they can't fight ISIS because they have families and lives to live, and ISIS poses a small threat in Syria - a country no one wants to be in. Stop pretending that you're 'criticising Islam' - blaming 1.5 billion Muslims, which you did in the very first reply to me on this thread, is criticising Muslims.

And this is exactly what ISIS want, they want the west to alienate Muslims and to reject the refugees. They believe (although mistakenly) that all Muslims will rise up in the defence of ISIS in a massive war, to achieve this, they are terrorising us and trying to make us fear Muslims so that we segregate them. So whether you like it or not, you're helping ISIS by hating Islam because three extremists attacked Brussels yesterday.

It is possible to criticise a religion without criticising its followers in some specific instances. For example if you took something which the Quoran says and said that it incites violence, but you didn't do that, instead you said that Muslims worldwide are allowing terrorist attacks to happen. Personally, I am grateful that the vast majority of Muslims are great people, and I'm betting you haven't even been to a predominantly Muslim country.

But keep calling me a cupcake if it dismisses my argument in your eyes

Much of what I said was actually just trolling and tongue in cheek, but I stand by what I said before. I don't know if any of the Abrahamic religions could be described as religions of peace, certainly not Islam.
I don't care much for those who attack criticism of religion rather than focusing on what we should be talking about. I don't care much for those who play the victim card for those who don't need.

And yes, I have been to a country where Islam is the major religion.

If I critcised Islam, it wouldn't simply be because three extremists attacked Brussels yesterday. It would probably be because of that, the Paris attacks, 7/7, 9/11, The Madrid bombings, the murder of Lee Rigby, Boko Haram, Al Shabab, Attacks in Istanbul and in the US, and so on. Not to mention the destruction of ancient heritage sites.

If I critcised Islam, it would be because of countries like Saudi Arabia.

I don't much care if the followers or its appeasers like you are bothered by that. Either it reforms and becomes modern or it should go, and when it comes to reform, if you're not part of the solution then you are part of the problem.

QFA .

Exactly, blaming Islam and Islam alone on these tragedies is stupid. You've neglected to consider the other factors which brought about these tragedies. Muslims don't just become radicalised, the war in Syria is a major factor contributing to this, the war in the Middle East - Islamophobia and the American 'war on terror'. There are so many things which have helped contribute towards these tragedies occurring, but all you see is Islam. It's one-dimensional viewpoints like this which are causing the divisions in society, Islam alone is not responsible for these things - evidence of this is because billions of Muslims live across this planet without ever becoming radicalised or possessing extremist intent. That clearly suggests that Islam alone is not the cause of these issues.

Let's take some examples:

Seifeddine Rezgui (Tunisia beach attack) - he wasn't a strict follower of Islam, there were reports that he liked to drink and he used drugs, he was reportedly radicalised as Gadaffi fell. He was also reportedly high on cocaine during his assault, meanwhile Islam says "Prophet Muhammad said, 'Every intoxicant is Khamr (alcohol) and all Khamr is Haram (unlawful or not permitted).'" So this radical Islam is not actually following Islam to its core. Therefore, other issues apart from 'the religion of Islam' contributed towards his radicalisation. As I said above, he was radicalised by the fall of Gadaffi. Conflict radicalises people, and this person might have been Muslim and ISIS, but he ignored some of Islam's fundamental teachings.

Islam also strictly condemns the killing of civilians: According to all Muslim scholars it is not permissible to kill women or children unless they are fighting against the Muslims. According to the Hanafi, Hanbali , Maliki , and Shafi'i schools it is not permissible to kill old men, monks, peasants, employees and traders (this meaning male non-combatants).
Harming civilian areas and pillaging residential areas is also forbidden,^[33] as is the destruction of trees, crops, livestock and farmlands.^[29][34] The Muslim forces may not loot travelers, as doing so is contrary to the spirit of jihad.^[35] Nor do they have the right to use the local facilities of the native people without their consent. If such a consent is obtained, the Muslim army is still under the obligation to compensate the people financially for the use of such facilities. However, Islamic law allows the confiscation of military equipment and supplies captured from the camps and military headquarters of the combatant armies.^[33][36]:

Another example. ISIS killed the hostage Kayla Mueller, while Islam says Women and children prisoners of war cannot be killed under any circumstances, regardless of their religious convictions.

Anyone who pays the slightest bit of attention to what Islam actually says

knows that ISIS are not representative of Islam and actually represent a tiny tiny portion of people with a warped idea of Islam.

It's the failure of idiots like you to distinguish between these sick terrorists and the rest of Islam which is dividing society.

You can throw me any poll which suggests that x Muslims have radical beliefs, but radical beliefs are not equivalent to radical actions. I think that the entire planet should have no racial or religious divisions whatsoever

The reason ISIS has become so dangerous is because of its name. 'Islamic state...' - it has Islamic in its name. Al-Qaeda, Al-Shabab, etc - they don't claim to be the true messengers of Islam. ISIS does, and it is manipulating weak-minded people like you into thinking that ISIS is Islam.

ISIS is not Islam, its fighters, its terrorists all go against the most fundamental things that Islam says. .

Exactly, blaming Islam and Islam alone on these tragedies is stupid.

ISIS is not Islam, its fighters, its terrorists all go against the most fundamental things that Islam says. Now you should draw this distinction yourself before your hatred contributes to the influx of absurd radicalisation and hate that is going on in this world

I'm not talking about banning it, but I am talking about confronting it. That seems to be just one of the many things you don't understand.

Holy books are notoriously contradictory, so to say that they expressly forbid killing is fruitless. They talk about not killing in one section and then killing in another. So throwing random quotes around is pointless.

People are using these old scriptures and teachings in order to live a certain way of life and to justify their actions in one way or another. There is an element of human choice, however you can neither escape nor ignore what is written in these books. To do so would be plain ignorant. And to criticise said writings is logical.

Instead of screaming "not all Muslims" straight away, perhaps you ought to try considering the impact that said religious writings have on religious culture, and how much time dictates their very way of life. Then tell me it has nothing to do with it. Do that and I will call you a bold face liar.

If you can't/won't accept evidence even when it's presented to you in the form of graphs and stats then you are plain ignorant. And if you won't do anything to change it, and if you instead choose to attack those who criticise the religion involved, then you are part of the problem.

x

you can blame any number of factors. You can drag in the US, Israel, human inherent wickedness, the Crusades, the fall of the Caliphate, the Sykes-Picot agreement etc etc

Bottom line, we are confronted with a ring of "Islamists" claiming to fight in the way of Allah, in a legitimate jihad

you can of course say (as most Muslims do) : this has nothing to do with Islam : however, I am afraid that you are deluding yourself. Jihadis have, just simply, embraced one particular, extreme interpretation of Islam, with which most Muslims seem to disagree

as far as non-Muslims are concerned, ISIS's interpretation of Islam is just as valid as any other : as an example, how could a Muslim say which interpretation of Christianity is correct, which is false ? who speaks the truth - Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, one of the various sects of Protestantism ?

Just consider: in a Muslim's view, not one of Christianity's interpretations is correct : if anything, it would be not the Christian majority, but the ultra-minority Unitarist fringe group (i.e. those Christians who deny the Trinity and Jesus's divinity) who would be the less misguided (still, they don't recognise Muhammad's prophethood...). Majority/minority is irrelevant to the issue of "truth"

In the same way, it is not possible for us "kuffar" to recognise which of Islam's interpretations is correct and which is false

This is not our job : our job is simply to assist "moderate" Muslims and help them to defeat, within their communities, violent terrorism acting in the name of Islam. The theological subtleties are not for us : by the way, as we are always being reminded, we are ignorant, we don't know Arabic, we have been "brainwashed" etc etc -how could we possibly adjudicate among competing "Islamic" theories ?

all the best

This post consists of a lot of nothingness, a lot of assumptions, and you agreeing with me. I'm not sure why you butted in.

i didnt find anything in your post to agree with, which is why i assume youve chosen not to comment - you know you are wrong in apologising for islamists and extremists, ie you are part of the problem . the longer you do that and ignore the root of islamic extremism in your community the longer it will continue , and therefore the more stigma is attached to all muslims. so you need to change your tactic for the good of everyone

I find it hilarious that you ignored everything I said.

You said "no they don't" (about ISIS fighters not following proper Islam)

I just freaking proved it to you, and you ignore it, you toolbox.

"as far as non-Muslims are concerned, ISIS's interpretation of Islam is just as valid as any other"

This quote above is rubbish. You literally just claimed that non-Muslims think that ISIS purports an equally valid interpretation of Islam to 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide. What a load of crap.

it is not possible for us "kuffar" to recognise which of Islam's interpretations is correct and which is false

This is not our job : our job is simply to assist "moderate" Muslims and help them to defeat, within their communities, violent terrorism acting in the name of Islam. The theological subtleties are not for us : by the way, as we are always being reminded, we are ignorant, we don't know Arabic, we have been "brainwashed" etc etc -how could we possibly adjudicate among competing "Islamic" theories ?

so, why don't you tell us which interpretation of Christianity is correct ?

once again :

emphasis added