an example of "a religion of peace" sect

[Astral Monk]

I dunno. Do ISIS and their ilk think they are fighting a global jihad? Are they really divorced from concrete political circumstances? If so then they are really dangerous because theyd be driven purely by freefloating ideology.

 

[gatito]

There is not such a thing, aside from following its texts to the letter. But then we can't say...

 

When yoy say "we who can't say.." do you mean those of you who couldn't be bothered to watch the documentary or those of you who are Trumpists or those of you who are ignorant or those of you who belong to some other group?

 

...because its texts instruct the followers to commit those very terrorist acts.

 

So perhaps it's more accurate to say: inauthentic Islam is a religion of peace, because it omits the verses of violence from its practice and ideology.

 

and the Bible (both Old and New Testaments) advocates exactly the same sort of ignorant barbarity...

 

Edited December 28, 2015 by gatito

[Aetherous]

I dont think 'religion of peace' is a good source of information on this.

 

It's good to consider that site, and then to see the truth for oneself by reading multiple translations of the passages here. Doing that convinced me.

 

Whereas talking to Muslims only convinced me that they're either taught differently from what the Quran literally tells them, by various scholars and experts in the law...or they are taught how to lie about it to outsiders.

 

Why? What would be the driving cause?

 

Terrorists aren't rational...they are blowing themselves up and taking innocents with them. They do it for Allah and their religion. That's not based in reasoning or even a very clear form of cause and effect.

 

These things dont happen without a cause. Terrorism as we know it is the only route left for an overwhelmed party to combat a larger force that they cant actually fight in open warfare.

 

You're thinking of insurgency or guerilla warfare, which was how the Iraq occupation had to be fought by US forces. Terrorism is something else entirely, because they become the offense rather than the smart defense...entering other countries and randomly committing acts. There isn't a larger force occupying terrorists...actually, the larger force (US) left, and shortly after this terrorist group ISIS swiftly overtook large portions of Iraq.

 

They are not the rebel forces...they are fanatics who follow an ideology which has rules for dealing with those who are of different ideologies. They're not reacting to things done against them by others...they are acting upon the world according to their ideology.

 

Why Paris? I dunno, maybe its most convenient, or maybe the powers behind it all feel that the French will be more inclined to start accepting totalitarianism in the name of security. I mean, my impression of French politics is not good.

 

I recall that ISIS claimed the attack, and said that Paris and France was their biggest target because of its continued decadence after Charlie Hebdo. It wasn't political, but ideological and religious...they think Paris is the most evil place on earth.

 

As for sources, just look at the Quran. The basic message is peaceful slavery to God.

 

There may be truth to that. That also implies slavery to Allah's religion, to Allah's prophet, etc.

 

Spreading the faith by the sword is not really a mandate.

 

It really is, though. Clear proof in the links I've provided for those who are willing to see.

[Aetherous]

When yoy say "we who can't say.." do you mean those of you who couldn't be bothered to watch the documentary or those of you who are Trumpists or those of you who are ignorant or those of you who belong to some other group?

 

I mean everyone who can speak rationally and honestly.

 

and the Bible (both Old and New Testaments) advocates exactly the same sort of ignorant barbarity...

 

This thread has nothing to do with the Bible. It's always an incredibly weak argument to detract attention away from what's being discussed onto another matter entirely.

 

Furthermore, while the Bible contains some violent verses, there aren't really any adherents who follow them, even though there do exist fundamentalist Christians and Jews...whereas with Islam we have too many who do follow violent verses. One is a problem, which we're discussing, and the other isn't at all (but could potentially be).

 

There's also the fact that the violent verses of the Quran are worse and more numerous. Are there verses in the Bible that call for what we could consider as "terrorist" acts? Or just violent acts.

 

And finally, in terms of Christianity, it's a matter of following the teachings of Jesus first and foremost. While his teachings don't erase the violent verses from the Bible, they do negate them with verses of peaceful and merciful behavior. Most of the teachings of his disciples are similar, and seeing as how they as the next in line in terms of interpreting Jesus' words, they are taken as priority above other verses in the Bible. Although this isn't a very strong point I'm making in this case, since those violent verses still do exist, it's also a fact that influences how Christians behave, in comparison to Muslims.

[gatito]

Northern Ireland convinced me that there's no shortage of Christian terrorists (and PIRA were heavily funded by Irish-Americans incidentally...)

 

The sreets were literally running with blood...

 

However, that didn't lead me to the conclusion that every Irish-American or Christian was a terrorist...

 

Similarly, the vast majority of the 1.5 billion Muslims are not terrorists.

 

However, Trump and his supporters are certainly creating many, many more...

[Aetherous]

Northern Ireland convinced me that there's no shortage of Christian terrorists (and PIRA were heavily funded by Irish-Americans incidentally...)

 

The sreets were literally running with blood...

 

However, that didn't lead me to the conclusion that every Irish-American or Christian was a terrorist...

 

Because you're capable of critical thinking...

 

Similarly, the vast majority of the 1.5 billion Muslims are not terrorists.

 

It's hard to discern the truth of that, since we don't know who terrorists are apart from a few.

 

However, Trump and his supporters are certainly creating many, many more...

 

How are they creating terrorists? By being critical of Islam? Having your religion criticized causes otherwise normal people to turn to terrorist groups for support? Is that really your perspective, or if he creating them another way?

[gatito]

It's hard to discern the truth of that, since we don't know who terrorists are apart from a few.

 

Look at how many attacks and interdictions actually occur - not many and there are a lot of Muslims around...

 

In contrast, PIRA were a lot more active (although they (eventually) realised that killing non-combatants was a very bad idea).

 

How are they creating terrorists? By being critical of Islam? Having your religion criticized causes otherwise normal people to turn to terrorist groups for support? Is that really your perspective, or if he creating them another way?

 

It's a bit more complicated than "having your religion critiqued" and if you're going to deploy this kind of simplistic misdirection, then it's probably going to be quite difficult to have a serious conversation about it with you...

 

Perhaps consider that this may be a more helpful approach?: -

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3348005/You-aint-no-Muslim-Bruv-trends-Twitter.html

Edited December 29, 2015 by gatito

[Aetherous]

It's a bit more complicated than "having your religion critiqued" and if you're going to deploy this kind of simplistic misdirection, then...

 

It wasn't an attempt at misdirection at all. How is it more complicated? What on earth could Trump do that would cause a normally thinking Muslim to go and join a terrorist organization where they murder innocent people? We are responsible for our own actions. These terrorist groups they throw gays off of rooftops to their death, behead women, have young boys as prostitutes...in addition to mass murdering innocent bystanders. Trump not wanting to allow Syrian refugees in the country? Wanting to monitor mosques? That's enough to tip a person over the line and strap a bomb on their chest?

 

Please think clearly about whether anyone's actions are truly causing otherwise rational and peace loving people to become terrorists. If the religion is peaceful, then its adherents won't do these things...you know the tree by its fruit, to quote the Bible.

 

Perhaps consider that this may be a more helpful approach?: -

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3348005/You-aint-no-Muslim-Bruv-trends-Twitter.html

 

Actually I think that's the very opposite of helpful, because it's people still insisting that Islam is a peaceful religion despite there being ample evidence that it's not. To insist that Islam is peaceful permits Islamic terrorism to easily fester in the background of our society. It's too tolerant and apologetic of an attitude to have...it's like burying your head in the sand after seeing a predator. On the other hand, to confront reality and admit that Muslims have this tendency in their group which we don't tolerate as a society, makes it quite a bit more challenging for their terrorists to operate in the midst of us. It's harder for a terrorist to do anything if they're carefully watched and monitored, versus if everyone is apologetic to them out of fear of being considered a bigot or something, and everyone gives them total freedom equal to any other person. They then have the freedom to plot and act out any act they desire.

[gatito]

You seem like someone who's very frightened to me.

 

As far as you're concerned Daesh have achieved exactly what they want to achieve...

[Aetherous]

You seem like someone who's very frightened to me.

 

I'm not frightened at all. I'm realistic about a problem. I'm also not afraid of being called a bigot or frightened, as is typical of the behavior and mentality of people on your side of the argument, despite the opposite being true of me.

 

Actually, there's the idea that what you see in others is the flaw that's in your own perception. If you see people who confront reality and problems head on as being "frightened", then look at what you're too afraid to confront. Perhaps it's just your own issue that you're seeing in the mirror. Or to put it simply, "When you're pointing your finger, there are three pointing back at you." I'm not the one who buries their head in the sand when confronted with an enemy.

 

As far as you're concerned Daesh have achieved exactly what they want to achieve...

 

First of all, calling them Daesh is not really as offensive to them as the media has claimed.

 

Second...they don't strive to simply make people afraid. In my case, they also don't strive to make people more aware and responsive. How I am is actually opposed to their plans. They would prefer if everyone was apologetic toward Islam, despite what they do...that way, they can easily slip in and (attempt to) dominate us. Their overarching goal is to spread Islam across the globe and get rid of all secular or other religious governments and people. That's what they want to achieve, not simply to make people alert.

[gatito]

Wilfred Thesiger once wandered the salt marshes of Iraq in perfect safety as Mubarak bin London.

And, as I pointed out, Afghanistan was perfectly safe and welcoming in 1974 (as were Iraq and Iran).

After the Soviets invaded, Western military advisors armed, trained and fought alongside the Muj now more commonly referred to as jihadis...

Unless the Quran was rewritten in the interim it's reasonable to conclude that "Islam" wasn't a problem then.

Why do you imagine that "Islam" is the problem now...?

Edited December 29, 2015 by gatito

[Aetherous]

Please refer back to post #24 and watch the video of Islamic history, and also read the hyperlink in my posts that refer to the violent passages in the Quran. It's great if an Islamic country is totally peaceful for non-Muslims to be in...it's very unfortunate that Iraq and Afghanistan are in such bad shape today, and it's also very unfortunate that non-Muslims are in greater danger than previously in Muslim countries today.

Also, I didn't plan on getting into a discussion in this thread. I will probably bow out now...what more can be said? Although we disagree on this issue, Gatito, there is no bad blood outside of this discussion on my side.

[gatito]

As far as "Islam" is concerned, frankly, I'm much more concerned about what the next fuckwit who occupies the Oval Office will do to scew-up not only the USA, South America, the Middle East and Eastern Europe but also Western Europe...

I really didn't think that after (born-again-"Christian") Bush and his ventriloquist's dummy (Roman Catholic) Blair it could get any worse...!

 

However, God help you (and us) if it's Donald the Dickhead in the White House!

[Taoist Texts]

Wilfred Thesiger once wandered the salt marshes of Iraq in perfect safety as Mubarak bin London.

Thesiger waited a decade to write up his Arabian adventures, which included climbing and crossing sand dunes 700 feet high, murderous threats from warring Arab tribes

 

 

And, as I pointed out, Afghanistan was perfectly safe and welcoming in 1974 (as were Iraq and Iran).

 

Autumn 1974[edit]

It is announced that another attempt to overthrow the regime has been discovered and quashed; its leader has been executed and 11 participants imprisoned. Shortly afterward there is trouble in Takhar province, where the Muslim Brotherhood, which dislikes President Daud's secularizing policy, is very influential. The government is obliged to take stern action; 70 members of the brotherhood are arrested, along with the governor of the province, the Revenue Commissioner, and the Superintendent of Police, and all are brought to trial on charges of plotting against the state.

 

Unless the Quran was rewritten in the interim it's reasonable to conclude that "Islam" wasn't a problem then.

Those 3 nations were secular, with islam kept firmly in check then.

[gatito]

Thesiger waited a decade to write up his Arabian adventures, which included climbing and crossing sand dunes 700 feet high, murderous threats from warring Arab tribes

 

as I said - referring to Arabia:-

 

Saudi Arabian Wahhabism is indeed seriously fucked-up, as is the redneck version of Christianity practiced by contemporary American Nazis.

 

and from your own source - but actually referring to Iraq:-

 

In the 1950s, Thesiger lived off and on for seven years in the marshes of southern Iraq, an area once thought to be the location of the Garden of Eden. (This water land was later drained and essentially destroyed by Saddam Hussein.) Here he once again adapted to the native lifestyle, living in a reed hut, traveling by canoe, helping to herd water buffalo and killing wild boar. (By the time Thesiger left the marshes in 1958, writes Maitland, he had shot “approximately a thousand wild boar.”) But Thesiger also functioned as the region’s doctor, treating “boils, dysentery, eczema, ulcers” and other ailments. Once he excised a diseased eye. He also performed, on boys and men, thousands of circumcisions.

 

 

Autumn 1974[edit]

It is announced that another attempt to overthrow the regime has been discovered and quashed; its leader has been executed and 11 participants imprisoned. Shortly afterward there is trouble in Takhar province, where the Muslim Brotherhood, which dislikes President Daud's secularizing policy, is very influential. The government is obliged to take stern action; 70 members of the brotherhood are arrested, along with the governor of the province, the Revenue Commissioner, and the Superintendent of Police, and all are brought to trial on charges of plotting against the state.

 

Another one who didn't actually inform themselves by watching this documentary...

 

A few years ago Afghanistan (now somewhere that no Westerner in their right mind would set foot) was on the hippy trail to the Himalayas and home to a more authentic form of Islam, which has now been wiped-out by the Taliban (as far as I'm aware).

 

See this 1974 documentary:-

 

 

Authentic Islam is indeed a religion of peace and I have Muslim friends who utterly condemn the atrocities practiced in the name of their religion and who now live in constant fear as a result of the way that they're viewed by radicalised Westerners (e.g. Donald Trump supporters) who are dancing to the tune that Daesh are playing... !

 

Those 3 nations were secular, with islam kept firmly in check then.

 

In fact, they were moderate Muslim states (unlike extremist Saudi Arabia).

[gatito]

And for 3bob and his snuff movie, here's an example of another religion of peace sect at work:-

 

https://www.iraqbodycount.org/

 

Don't the Christians have some saying about removing the plank from their own eyes first...?

Edited December 29, 2015 by gatito

[Taoist Texts]

However, God help you (and us) if it's Donald the Dickhead in the White House!

According to CBS’ L.A. affiliates, neighbors of Muslim mass murderers Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik noticed some very suspicious things going on at the couple’s apartment in the days and weeks leading to the horrific massacre that took fourteen lives, but they chose not to report anything, for fear of being labeled “racist.”

 http://takimag.com/article/sum_ting_wong_david_cole/print#ixzz3vh4RJfiX

 

The media and the Democrats can’t do all the work themselves; average “victicrats” must do their part too. Working together, this coalition has succeeded in creating the situation we have now, in which risking a mass-murder spree is actually considered the lesser of two evils compared to being seen as racist.

 http://takimag.com/article/sum_ting_wong_david_cole/print#ixzz3vh4x5WoM

[gatito]

Back on topic (for the planks...)

 

 

Anything But Humane

 

The search for a "humane" way of killing people should be seen for what it is -- a search to make executions more palatable to those carrying out and witnessing the killing. This includes the governments that wish to appear humane and the public in whose name the killing is carried out.

 

Lethal injection can cause excruciating pain. Since the first lethal injection on December 7, 1982, over 1,000 prisoners in the USA have been executed by this method and it has all but replaced other methods of execution.

 

In the USA, a number of lethal injection executions have been botched. Some executions have lasted between 20 minutes to over an hour and prisoners have been seen gasping for air, grimacing and convulsing during executions. Autopsies have shown severe, foot long chemical burns to the skin and needles have been found in soft tissue.

 

Lethal injection was designed to prevent many of the disturbing images associated with other forms of execution. However, lethal injection increases the risk that medical personnel will be involved in killing for the state, in breach of long-standing principles of medical ethics.

 

Virtually all codes of professional ethics which consider the death penalty oppose health professional participation. Despite this, health professionals are required by law in many death penalty states to assist executions and in some cases have carried out the killings.

 

www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/lethal-injection

 

[Marblehead]

I suppose we could go back to public hanging.  That normally breaks the neck and death is instantaneous.  Only those with very strong neck muscles would die eventually from suffocation and even that doesn't take long.

[gatito]

I suppose we could go back to public hanging.  That normally breaks the neck and death is instantaneous.  Only those with very strong neck muscles would die eventually from suffocation and even that doesn't take long.

 

Wunderbar!

 

Very humane...

 

 

or, like Daesh, you could save money on the rope...

 

Edited December 29, 2015 by gatito

[dwai]

Why? What would be the driving cause?

 

These things dont happen without a cause. Terrorism as we know it is the only route left for an overwhelmed party to combat a larger force that they cant actually fight in open warfare.

 

Why Paris? I dunno, maybe its most convenient, or maybe the powers behind it all feel that the French will be more inclined to start accepting totalitarianism in the name of security. I mean, my impression of French politics is not good.

 

As for sources, just look at the Quran. The basic message is peaceful slavery to God. Spreading the faith by the sword is not really a mandate.

 

But, have Muslim groups always adhered to this? Did Mohammed? I'm sure a case could be made against it. But the Quran doesnt implore Muslims to violently spread Islam, or really to proselytize at all. And, terrorism driven by religion isnt a proselytizing act meant to bring Islam to kaffir. Its a response to being under attack by foreign forces. Religion is a prop in that response. Even western powers arent trying to kill Islam, just to control resoucez and spread unrest in order to gain resouces. But somehow the fight becomes religious, partly because Islam the spirituality cant be divorced from Islam the political system.

 

I dont think 'religion of peace' is a good source of information on this. Better to read the nonsense in Islamic discussion forms.

 

8)

my native country India has been at the forefront of bearing the islamist onslaught in modern history since it's independence in 1947.  There were several wars waged against Pakistan. There has been a steadfast onslaught of terrorism since the 1970s.

 

The main objective is guised as reactions to many an affront (mostly imagined) - Such as Kashmir being muslim majority was ceded to India (leading to one of the world's most volatile flash points). When the Punjabi, urdu speaking Muslims of West Pakistan were perpetrating a genocide of epic proportions in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), india had to intervene (in order to prevent massive influx of refugees from East Pakistan into India). As a result, Bangladesh was created. Pakistan took this an an affront to their existence and resumed a massive campaign to indoctrinate and infiltrate various bordering regions (with overt and covert support from the Communists of china). Fight for the "freedom" of the Sikhs as the Khalistan movement. Fight for the "freedom" of the Kashmiris, etc.

 

However, the main objective that was disguised under these "causes". The main objective is to establish a world wide "Ummah" - a pan-islamic Caliphate. I read about the designs to do this before ISIS was even existent, in an article in an Indian magazine in the early 90s. It would span from West Asia to East Asia. And from there, the rest of the world. Only hindrance is India, which is a secular, pluralist and majority Hindu (blasphemers of the highest order according to the islamists) nation. 

 

If the people in the West are becoming aware of this monstrosity (islamic chauvinism and terrorism) now, Modern Indians have known this (like the Israelites have) for a good part of 70 years. 

 

Here's a report on the "Ummah" -- 

http://www.clarionproject.org/sites/default/files/Muslim-Brotherhood-Special-Report.pdf

[Apech]

While the OP vid and other pics and so on are barbaric - at least we can content ourselves that the internet has provided us with a powerful tool for recognising that the world always has been and always probably will contain all that is worst and all that is best about how human's treat each other.  We're getting very childish about this these days - as if we expect it to be otherwise - and some of us are ending up very frightened - or unwilling to accept some fear as normal ... like this girl ...

 

[gatito]

Those of you who think that all Muslims are "the problem" need to devote 90 minutes of your lives to watching this discussion between a Muslim and a Christian (or perhaps a Jew?), because, at the moment, your racial stereotyping is as much a part of "the problem" as is Daesh...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Brian]

While the OP vid and other pics and so on are barbaric - at least we can content ourselves that the internet has provided us with a powerful tool for recognising that the world always has been and always probably will contain all that is worst and all that is best about how human's treat each other. We're getting very childish about this these days - as if we expect it to be otherwise - and some of us are ending up very frightened - or unwilling to accept some fear as normal ... like this girl ...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QqgNcktbSA

A direct, unavoidable and unsurprising consequence of establishing government as God.

[Marblehead]

l ... like this girl ...

That girl is scary.

 

Edited to replace the word "bitch" with "girl".

Edited December 29, 2015 by Marblehead