Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TaintedLight)
    I think you are a product of a failed society.



    Agreed. However one should also draw a line and appreciate who, from an Islamic point of view, is valued more. If you have muslim who is often drunk and another, completely sober, it's conceivable to reject the drunkard man's Islamic preaching outright.

    Maybe in the past week I read (from BBC if I recall) the Paris terrorists spend their last day Brussels partying in a pub or something. Are these supposed to be fair reflection of some divine religious struggle? I certainly don't think so. It's more like a bunch of people wanting the Call of Duty experience in real life.

    And come to think of it, it looks like every religion is in its essence is a political ideology. I don't think it was the outcome the creators wanted but unfortunately it unfolded that way.
    from what I have read (mostly, about Abdeslam and his friends) rapid radicalisation involved abandoning wine and women, starting to pray in the middle of the night etc etc. People were surprised by the rapidity of the transformation (it all took place over six months)

    I have heard many different stories about jihadis , including that, sometimes, they may drink and party in order to deflect suspicions... but, quite honestly, I don't know,

    However, in the end, it is useless to discuss who is a "true, authentic" Muslim and who isn't : as far we can tell, a Muslim is someone who thinks of himself as a Muslim and who is inspired by the "holy texts".

    Muslims themselves have much more strict rules : in fact, sometimes it seems that the main concern of half the ummah is kicking the other half "out of the fold of Islam" because they slander the sahabah, (companions) commit "kufr akbar" (major disbelief), recognise other prophets after Muhammad etc etc

    But, as poor, ignorant Kuffar, we cannot follow them into those theological subtleties ... for us, someone who says he's a Muslim, and kills in the name of Allah, so as to make his word reign supreme, is a Muslim

    best
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    from what I have read (mostly, about Abdeslam and his friends) rapid radicalisation involved abandoning wine and women, starting to pray in the middle of the night etc etc. People were surprised by the rapidity of the transformation (it all took place over six months)

    I have heard many different stories about jihadis , including that, sometimes, they may drink and party in order to deflect suspicions... but, quite honestly, I don't know,

    However, in the end, it is useless to discuss who is a "true, authentic" Muslim and who isn't : as far we can tell, a Muslim is someone who thinks of himself as a Muslim and who is inspired by the "holy texts".

    Muslims themselves have much more strict rules : in fact, sometimes it seems that the main concern of half the ummah is kicking the other half "out of the fold of Islam" because they slander the sahabah, (companions) commit "kufr akbar" (major disbelief), recognise other prophets after Muhammad etc etc

    But, as poor, ignorant Kuffar, we cannot follow them into those theological subtleties ... for us, someone who says he's a Muslim, and kills in the name of Allah, so as to make his word reign supreme, is a Muslim

    best
    So if James watches a few videos of Al Qaeda and decides to change his name to Ali Ibn Abdullah bin Ali and blow himself up in public, he died as a muslim?

    For some the answer could be yes and they are precisely those people who latch on Islam to blame for some sort of closure or a stress release.

    I'm not sure about you though.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TaintedLight)
    So if James watches a few videos of Al Qaeda and decides to change his name to Ali Ibn Abdullah bin Ali and blow himself up in public, he died as a muslim?

    For some the answer could be yes and they are precisely those people who latch on Islam to blame for some sort of closure or a stress release.

    I'm not sure about you though.
    well, you are caricaturing of course : it's not a black or white situation

    you don't have only James ("he is but a pawn in their game "), you have ISIS, AL-Qaeda, Boko Haram, the Shabab, the militant Salafis, the Saudis , the Iranians etc all with their Sheyks, their mosques, quite some money, publishing houses, the videos, the glossy magazines etc. It's a huge galaxy : militant Islam goes from poor James who blows himself up to people much higher than him in the socio-political ladder (who, however, are far too indispensable to blow themselves up)

    So, who of these people is a Muslim, who isn't ? for a Muslim, the question will involve finding out who is "upon the truth", i.e. who follows the "correct interpretation" of the religion

    But, for us non-Muslims, there is not one "correct interpretation of the religion". They are all arbitrary, simply because Islam does not contain any revealed "truth". So, for us, they are (more or less) all equally true, or all equally false.

    So, we don't discriminate : whoever declares to be a Muslim, to follow the Quran, to fight for the supremacy of Islam against Kuffar invaders and blasphemers, even in their own lands, well, he is a Muslim - the subtleties of defensive/offensive jihad, of innocent/noninnocent kuffar escape us.

    What we recognize is that all Muslims are not the same : and that many Muslims are tolerant, peaceful people. However : who has the correct interpretation of Islam?

    Allahu alim (God knows) - fatwa over

    Edit : on Molenbeek mosques, an extremist preacher and jihadi networks http://www.france24.com/en/20160325-...iket-molenbeek
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    Yes : in fact, up to a certain point in time, the Caliphate developed an efficient administration, which included all the sectors you mentioned. A complex legal system was developed (based mainly on case law and the traditional legal schools) which ensured some consistency and effectiveness

    The Caliphate system however showed signs of stress and poor performance already towards the end of the 17th century, and attempts at reform proved, sometimes, worse than nothing, by randomly introducing elements of "Western" culture within traditional Islamic society

    Trying to revive this experience is a huge challenge : we see the difficulties that all allegedly "Islamic" States have in managing this difficult mix of secular and religious law and institutions

    In the UK, the Hizb (HIzb-ut-Tahrir) tried also to do this, even published detailed lists of Ministries and Offices which should administer the future "Caliphate" - ISIS beat them on time setting up a "Caliphate", but they are considerably less concerned about political theory

    best
    Yes it was very efficient in its day. However, the Ottoman Empire tried to make some reforms when the Sultan saw the empire was dying. Ironically, these were inspired by the rise if European secular values. If I remember correctly it met with some backlash though, with some jannisaries, scholars and pro-wahab factions called it bidah.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto...%93Wahhabi_War

    I think it'd be near-impossible to revive a functioning "Caliphate" unless it is backed by a dominant empire ( or a "world superpower" ) to propagate True Islam.

    Oh I never knew hizb tried to do that. I wonder if a British Caliphate involves aboloshing the monarchy, or just renaming the monarchy as Sultanate as we all know Islam likes to assimilate into western cultures. Sultana Elizabeth has a ring to it though.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chemting)
    Oh I never knew hizb tried to do that. I wonder if a British Caliphate involves aboloshing the monarchy, or just renaming the monarchy as Sultanate as we all know Islam likes to assimilate into western cultures. Sultana Elizabeth has a ring to it though.
    ]
    the Hizb tried to devise in theory a "modern" political system, mixing elements of the traditional Caliphate with elements taken from Western administrative systems : not specifically to set it up in the UK

    As far as fundamentalists however are concerned, Kingship (Sultanate) is a form of decadence from the Caliphate (there is a famous hadith about this). Kingdoms impinge on the Caliph's authority, which derives directly from God.

    So, I'm afraid no Sultana for the UK : and, in particular, according to another hadith, no State led by a woman could ever prosper

    best
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TaintedLight)
    I think you are a product of a failed society.



    .
    for pointing out the facts? interesting. you may make a partial observation about certain people being attracted to millitancy, but everyone else sees the bit you dont - that those groups tend to have an islamic grounding.

    you may be highlighting the losers that end up blowing themselves, but the reality again is these islamist organisations arnt a rag tag pack of societies wasters who happen to be attracted to islam, they are also some quite influencial and perhaps wealthy individuals with military and political connections who in each case of all islamist groups runs the show - and have an effective hierachy below them whos jobs it is to recruit, train, fund and arm the sacrificial pawns that end up coming from your community. so actually it is important to look behind the ideology that seem s to be the basis for all these islamist groups in a number of different countries
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed)
    for pointing out the facts? interesting. you may make a partial observation about certain people being attracted to millitancy, but everyone else sees the bit you dont - that those groups tend to have an islamic grounding.

    you may be highlighting the losers that end up blowing themselves, but the reality again is these islamist organisations arnt a rag tag pack of societies wasters who happen to be attracted to islam, they are also some quite influencial and perhaps wealthy individuals with military and political connections who in each case of all islamist groups runs the show - and have an effective hierachy below them whos jobs it is to recruit, train, fund and arm the sacrificial pawns that end up coming from your community. so actually it is important to look behind the ideology that seem s to be the basis for all these islamist groups in a number of different countries
    Now stating facts to suit one's agenda does make one a failure. For example, I can claim water is a health hazard and state "facts" to make it seem substantive. But that is just being delusional and narrow minded.

    The issue with people like you is the obsession with painting a huge diverse group of individuals with a single brush. If Hassan won the lottery and decided to invest all his winnings to a charitable causes, people like you would see this as a filmsy gesture and nothing else. However if Hassan blew himself in a charitable even, people like you would bring the pitchforks and start rambling how religion is causing all this instability and violence and whatever. Absentmindedness.

    Besides the point, the brand of preaching advocated by a militant's spokesman and non-militant-affiliated-spokesman is/will also (be) different. For example the 69-virgin-for-being-slain-as-a-martyr is a piece of fabrication according to the latter. #SurpriseSurprise

    Calling out on Muslims is not the right way to go.

    (Original post by mariachi)
    well, you are caricaturing of course : it's not a black or white situation

    you don't have only James ("he is but a pawn in their game ", you have ISIS, AL-Qaeda, Boko Haram, the Shabab, the militant Salafis, the Saudis , the Iranians etc all with their Sheyks, their mosques, quite some money, publishing houses, the videos, the glossy magazines etc. It's a huge galaxy : militant Islam goes from poor James who blows himself up to people much higher than him in the socio-political ladder (who, however, are far too indispensable to blow themselves up)

    So, who of these people is a Muslim, who isn't ? for a Muslim, the question will involve finding out who is "upon the truth", i.e. who follows the "correct interpretation" of the religion

    But, for us non-Muslims, there is not one "correct interpretation of the religion". They are all arbitrary, simply because Islam does not contain any revealed "truth". So, for us, they are (more or less) all equally true, or all equally false.

    So, we don't discriminate : whoever declares to be a Muslim, to follow the Quran, to fight for the supremacy of Islam against Kuffar invaders and blasphemers, even in their own lands, well, he is a Muslim - the subtleties of defensive/offensive jihad, of innocent/noninnocent kuffar escape us.

    What we recognize is that all Muslims are not the same : and that many Muslims are tolerant, peaceful people. However : who has the correct interpretation of Islam?

    Allahu alim (God knows) - fatwa over

    Edit : on Molenbeek mosques, an extremist preacher and jihadi networks http://www.france24.com/en/20160325-...iket-molenbeek

    I was just hoping for a "yes" or "no" tbh. Kids going on suicide are mission are really following James' path... imo.

    Personally, my Muslim test is gauging who practices the Shahada, Salah, Zakat, Ramadan and Hajj. Usually when you look at militants and their organizations they fail miserably in Zakat. If some pictures are deemed to be valid, then Salah is also a fail.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TaintedLight)
    Now stating facts to suit one's agenda does make one a failure. For example, I can claim water is a health hazard and state "facts" to make it seem substantive. But that is just being delusional and narrow minded.

    The issue with people like you is the obsession with painting a huge diverse group of individuals with a single brush. If Hassan won the lottery and decided to invest all his winnings to a charitable causes, people like you would see this as a filmsy gesture and nothing else. However if Hassan blew himself in a charitable even, people like you would bring the pitchforks and start rambling how religion is causing all this instability and violence and whatever. Absentmindedness.

    Besides the point, the brand of preaching advocated by a militant's spokesman and non-militant-affiliated-spokesman is/will also (be) different. For example the 69-virgin-for-being-slain-as-a-martyr is a piece of fabrication according to the latter. #SurpriseSurprise

    Calling out on Muslims is not the right way to go.




    I was just hoping for a "yes" or "no" tbh. Kids going on suicide are mission are really following James' path... imo.

    Personally, my Muslim test is gauging who practices the Shahada, Salah, Zakat, Ramadan and Hajj. Usually when you look at militants and their organizations they fail miserably in Zakat. If some pictures are deemed to be valid, then Salah is also a fail.
    if we are finger pointing all of a sudden, then indeed one can be pointed at you the apologist for these nutcases ideologies and subsequesnt , trying to disassociate them from the islamic background they have had for the 20+ years of their life, becuase they make a political action that they believe is in islams ultimate interest , but you do not. the fact that islam demands muslims to always put islamic agendas first before human ones (even their own family) can quite easily explain why it is people like this can commit attrocities like this against their fellow man. its the effect of propaganda. islamists have the perfect propaganda tool to use on muslims.
    out of everyone, your apologist dogma is what permits groups like this to exist and operate with so much autonomy in the islamic world
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed)
    if we are finger pointing all of a sudden, then indeed one can be pointed at you the apologist for these nutcases ideologies and subsequesnt , trying to disassociate them from the islamic background they have had for the 20+ years of their life, becuase they make a political action that they believe is in islams ultimate interest , but you do not. the fact that islam demands muslims to always put islamic agendas first before human ones (even their own family) can quite easily explain why it is people like this can commit attrocities like this against their fellow man. its the effect of propaganda. islamists have the perfect propaganda tool to use on muslims.
    out of everyone, your apologist dogma is what permits groups like this to exist and operate with so much autonomy in the islamic world
    Is everyone who disagrees with you an 'apologist'? :facepalm: grow up
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Frank Underwood)
    Is everyone who disagrees with you an 'apologist'? :facepalm: grow up
    everyone that apologies for islamist attrocities by saying "theyre not muslims/ they dont follow islam" is an apologist
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    In the light of the recent terrorist attacks in Brussels, i thought I would share a few reflections on which could be the terrorists' main objectives

    In the short term (this is a bit of a truism) terrorists aim to terrorise : to force people into changing their lifestyle, into renouncing part of what constitutes (in their eyes) our decadent habits, like going out, partying ; organising free discussions and debates, freely criticising prophets and religions, etc etc

    but the longer-term objective are Western Muslim communities. Terrorists want to cause a backlash against Muslims in the West. They hope that, faced with hostility by the population, and perhaps by restrictive measures by Governments, Muslims will feel progressively estranged and marginalized from the wider Western European societies

    This is in fact the only hope, for extremist movements, to avoid isolation : if they somehow manage to exacerbate contrasts and hostilities in our societies, to focus populations' resentment against Muslims, they may manage to somehow increase sympathies, by presenting themselves as the only defense of "true believers" against the "kuffar"

    For this reason, IMHO it is essential that we stand without hesitation behind the principle of non-discrimination. There is no such thing in our societies as "collective guilt". Any Muslim, just like any other citizen, is strictly responsible for his/her actions only

    Let us make no unnecessary gifts to the terrorists by presenting them with some (even vague) justification for their crimes. We have our own values, and for this reason we consider our societies to be the best thing going (as far as societies go).

    Let us not supply any shadow of an argument to terrorists.
    You try to look like some kind of posh left wing intellectual, that probably studied philosophy or some other useless subject
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RarestPepe)
    You try to look like some kind of posh left wing intellectual, that probably studied philosophy or some other useless subject
    does that deserve any comment ? no, I'm afraid

    best
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

1,605

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.