I feel that this board has become little more than a place to defame Islam as a terrible religion. I came across this article which discusses how great numbers of muslims fell into the trap of fundamentalism:
They tend to kill the moderates. That’s the biggest problem.
Did you read the article though? It discusses how Saudia Arabia’s puritan brand of Islam, among other influences, have been exported across the middle east creating the hotbed of fanaticism we see today. The problem is NOT Islam, the problem is how many have decided to interpret it and use it to oppose western cultural influences.
[quote=Gnosis]Did you read the article though? It discusses how Saudia Arabia’s puritan brand of Islam, among other influences, have been exported across the middle east creating the hotbed of fanaticism we see today. The problem is NOT Islam, the problem is how many have decided to interpret it and use it to oppose western cultural influences.
It’s not just Saudi Arabia’s brand of Islam; there’s also Iran. They’ve been known to sponsor terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
[quote=LRThunder]It’s not just Saudi Arabia’s brand of Islam; there’s also Iran. They’ve been known to sponsor terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
Was there Hamas and Hezbollah or even al-Fatah before the illegal Zionist occupation of Palestine?
Was there Gandhi movement or similiar to it in India before the occupation of India by the British?
Was there any Mendela movement in Black South Africa before it was occupied by the White British?
Were there any Afghan Mujahideen movements in Afghanistan before Russia’s invasion?
People of resistence use different notions/things/sentiments to energise their people to fight injustice/illegal occupation. If people are not religious they spark nationalistic pride/attachment. If people are religious they use religious instruction to fight injustice. Obviously christianity too is not exception.
What all these movements occurances prove is, people generally of any colour, nation, region, religion and race, are same when it comes to fighting injustice. People do fight back. if they are robbed by the thugs/robbers. Some people may even go further and take the law in their hand if they see law of the land is helpless or collaborating with the thugs/robbers. This fighting back has nothing to do with their faith/beliefs. It is a common thing that all humanity in general have it. Think about why Irish and British fought and still I don’t think fight is really over.
The comparison with Gandhi with Hamas would have more solid foundation if Hamas/the PLO had used similar tactics to Gandhi: peaceful civil disobedience, peaceful demonstrations. When a group is trying to obtain equal rights, they are usually more successful if they employ peaceful means even if their opponent does not. Look at the Civil Rights movement led by Martin Luther King Jr.
[quote=freedomm]Was there any Mendela movement in Black South Africa before it was occupied by the White British?
You need to check out the history of the Zulu nation prior to its encounter with the people of South Africa - Boer or British. They were bent upon creating an empire (indeed had created an empire) and Nelson Mandela is not exactly the paragon of virtue you purport him to be.
And as a Catholic of Irish ancestry, my people fought because the British suppresed the practice of our faith for centuries and they let us starve in 1847 while their warehouses were full (does this have a familiar ring to it? as in what Islam has done to Christian areas they have conquered throughout history?) BTW, the Norman British of the 13th century in Ireland became more Irish than the Irish. They accepted the culture and the people and settled in.
Moderate Islam is a complete and total farce. If there are moderates in Islam they are just as scared as we are of the fundamentalists. Until Islam gets control of their fanatics, don’t expect me to believe this myth of moderate Islam. The silence of so-called moderate Islam after 9/11 was defeaning.
[quote=LRThunder]The comparison with Gandhi with Hamas would have more solid foundation if Hamas/the PLO had used similar tactics to Gandhi: peaceful civil disobedience, peaceful demonstrations. When a group is trying to obtain equal rights, they are usually more successful if they employ peaceful means even if their opponent does not. Look at the Civil Rights movement led by Martin Luther King Jr.
Well, Hamas and Hezbollah did not came into existence the moment Israel was established.
Second, it is not necessarily that people’s reaction should/must be at the same pace/fashion/manner. The stronger someone’s conviction/faith/pride, the higher/stronger the reaction.
When injustice and brutality increased from Zionists side, then, as per laws of Nature, Hamas and Hezbollah came into the picture. The harder someone presses, the harder he should expect a reaction practically or theoritically or openly or internally depending upon the opponents’ situation.
When Phaorah was enjoying his heydays, his people were totally helpless but this does not mean that they did not have tendency or will to fight back and recue themselves from the clutches of tyrant.
The example of Gandhi’s moment was not to compare but to show that those who percieve Gandhi as a peaceful man should think twice and revise their opinion because he was not what generally people are made to believe through propaganda to discret all the valuable and sacrifices of Muslim freedom fighters of India which eventually forced British to leave India. It was Muslims’ rule that was snatched by the British through mischievious way when British came to India in the name of doing business. Gandhi came into the scene of freedom movements very late and in the last moments of British Empire’s life in India when she was already turned into a dead horse due to continuous fights and resistence mostly from the Muslims and people of other faith.
Not to mention the LTT movement of Sri Lanka.
“Robert Spencer has here assembled a collection of documents devastating to PC myth and multiculturalist wishful thinking. Anyone concerned about the dangers of politically motivated distortions of Islamic theology and history should not miss this explosive and enlightening volume.” JEFFREY RUBIN, Editor, Conservative Book Club
I think you need to think critically of Robert Spencer before you spread his values.
Let me correct your some miscoceptions here.
There is no such a thing as Moderate Islam or non-Moderate Islam.
Islam is Islam from the day one. And it’s FULL version is based on the Holy Quran and authentic Sunnah of the Last Prophet of God–Muhammed (PBUH).
Islam** and Muslim are two different and distinct terms.
Islam** means submission to the Will of God and that Will is fully revealed to the Last Prophet of God–Muhammed (PBUH) through the Holy Quran and Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) preached and established it through his Sunnah
A Muslim, means the one who inherits Islam from brith from his/her parents or adopts later willingly/knowingly, as his Way of Life (Addeen).
Not all Muslims are alike. They can be from a lip-service to highly devoted to the Will of God (Islam).
As such, not every Muslim’s action can be attribiuted to Islam, unless his action has sanctions/approval from the foundations of Islam --**The Holy Quran ** and the Authentic Sunnah of the last Prophet of Giod.
When some people criticise Hitler, Christians all of a sudden begin to claim that he was not a true Christian or he was more like a pagan than a Christian or he was not a Christian at all ect. Why? because they think that what Hitler did with millions of innocent Jews and others, was not what Christianity stands for.
In the same fashion, whenever you hear so and so act of voilence is commited by any Muslim, then you should ask Muslims first, if his act is justified by Islam. Because Muslim and Islam are two DIFFERENT things, hence they are different terms.
You cannot assume from yourself something by not even making a clear distinction between these terms (Islam and Muslims), then blame the whole Religion of Islam or all Muslims and then start creating new terms such as “Moderate Islam” or “Moderate Muslims”. These new terms (i.e., “Moderate Islam” and “Moderate Muslims”) exist only in the minds of people like you. They are not of Islam. Because Islam is not a relationship that cannot be broken. Islam is Addeen (The Way of Life). If any person does not follow atleast the main precepts of Islam, he cannot be called a Muslim. And in Islam there is no room for killing any innocent.
In Arabic: islam-christianity.net/
In English: fatherzakaria.net/
Rushed to press–it contains references as recent as June2002–for September 11 release, this exceptionally fluid argumentagainst militant Islam omits too many articles (a and the )but reports more Islamic savagery than Robert Spencer’s IslamUnveiled [BKL S 1 02] and critiques Muslim theology more thoroughlythan Timothy George’s Is the Father of Jesus the God of Muhammad?[BKL Ag 02]. Its most important distinction is Trifkovic’s insistencethat the “problem [for the West] is not prejudice about Islam, butfolly in the face of its violence and cruelty,” manifested today insuch horrors as the ongoing slaughter of Sudanese Christians and theappalling anti-Semitism of the Islamic press and such Islamic legalauthorities as the mufti of Jerusalem. Like Roger Scruton in TheWest and the Rest [BKL Ag 02], Trifkovic doesn’t endorse war againstIslam. Instead, the West must defend itself against Islamic aggression(e.g., by restricting immigration and reducing dependence onIslamic-controlled oil) and help non-Muslims oppressed in Islamicsocieties. Powerful stuff powerfully presented. Ray Olson
History proves that Hitler, although baptized a Catholic, was a neo-pagan and spent a large amount of time and effort attempting to collect occult things to aid his quest for Aryan supremacy. I don’t think I know of any historian who would acknowledge that Hitler was a Christian - he was a fascist, a contemporary and consort of Islamic fascists.
If, as you say, there is no room in Islam for killing the innocent, then explain away the blood of innocents which cries out to God across the known world - shed by Islamic terrorists. It’s not Christians out there blowing up people and crashing airplanes into skyscrapers in the name of a triune God. If you truely believed in Islam as you describe it, then you and all the rest of your co-religionists would be doing everything in your power to stop the terrorists. Unfortunately, this is not happening and the dancing in the streets after 9/11 is a gross example of this. Whether you want to acknowledge this or not, I will never forget that or the sight of the bodies of dead American soldiers being dragged through the streets of Somalia. Such things I would expect from the Huns in the 5th century or the Japanese in the 20th
And BTW, I did not coin the term moderate Islam. I read the article which prompted this thread.
Could the discussion return to the article that was posted?
Secondly, please read and comment on the article. Posting book covers that supposedly show the “true Islam” does not really contribute anything.
READ the Quran!
It calls for war on the “Mushrikeen” and the “People of the Book” (ie.Christians and Jews) who do not embrace the “true” religion (ie. Islam).
It calls those who believe that Christ is God ATHIESTS (Kaphara) and thus WAR must be waged against them.
The Quran IS HATE LITERATURE and should be BANNED in the West! And Mosques must not be allowed to be built.
We are not to blame Muslims for committing these terrorist acts because they are ONLY FOLLOWING what is WRITTEN in the “holy” Quran and the HADITHS of the “prophet”.
I was born in the MIddle East and lived in Islamic countries to NOT BE FOOLED. Unfortunately, we live in countries so affraid of being called “racist” or “intolerant” that we will allow followers of a religion that calls on its followers to KILL US into our very lands.
Is this not INSANE!
Spencer has Islam pegged. He exposes the truth. He is doing a great service for everyone. Even Muslims.
Maybe all those gay rights groups should start reading the Koran. That should tickle them in many places.
The article is excellent and I’ve seen the same argument made and supported by numerous other sources.
Look at what your muslim-hating authors have in common:
They are not historians
They are not experts in Islamic theology or culture.
It should tell you something when 100 percent of people who adopt their lines are neither as well. Look for a professional historian who deals with the region, and a professional theologian, and see if you can find any well respected ones who think Robert Spencer is an academic to take seriously.
[quote=Gnosis]I feel that this board has become little more than a place to defame Islam as a terrible religion. I came across this article which discusses how great numbers of muslims fell into the trap of fundamentalism:
Moderate Muslim - A Muslim who is moderate is not a Muslim, for the teachings of the islamic scriptures are not moderate and hence he does not follow his scriptures, and is thus a muslim by name alone. According to the quran itself, a moderate muslim who wants to be peaceful and kind etc is not a muslim. The last 24 surahs of the quran (Chronologically speaking) i.e. those of Madina, have 2 principle themes: a) You must fight b) If you do not fight and terrorize and kill, you are a bad muslim, a hypocrite, the most vile of creatures, and you will be taken to the hottest place in hell to be personally tortured by allah himself.
Radical Islam - this is simply fundamental islam, which is radical and extreme by our own moderate standards.