Islamic reaction to radical Muslims

[ozymandias]

Those that you consider terrorists could be freedom fighters in the eyes of many.

Doesn't work that way. If they use terrorist tactics against civilian targets, they are terrorists -- even if they are freedom fighters. Being a freedom fighter does not exclude you from also being a terrorist.

Terrorism is a matter of tactics, not a matter of whether or not the observer agrees with their goals.

Like a member said George Washington was the biggest terrorist on earth in the british eyes.

And that member was wrong, as far as I know -- Washington did not attack civilians, nor did he engage in a campaign to bring terror to the population. In fact, he did quite the opposite.

And Americans praise him right?

Indeed we do. He was a man that stood for good morals and fought the 'good fight', struggling through hardships to bring human rights to an entire nation and never stooped to terrorism to get his way.

[ozymandias]

Their approach is unheard of within the 23 year span of the prophethood of our beloved Prophet (saw). Islamic scripture and Islamic philosophy do not condone Taliban style approach.

Funny. The Taliban says differently -- based on those same lessons. They interpret the teachings differently than you do. This does not mean they are not Muslim, it means that they may be *bad* Muslims -- but they are still Muslim.

[imb706]

The only people who oppose RESPECT party always turns out to be some Pro Khazar Israeli supporter

IMB iam amazed how you brought up RESPECT party into this topic and thread. We know your an Israeli Jew, why hide it?


Do you want us to accept Israeli and Khazar domination or do you simply want us to accept what ever non sense that comes out of you???

Illustrates my point perfectly. The people who form RESPECT (despite the fact the name stands for left wing causes) are far right wing muslims who believe in jewish conspiracy theories, are against gay rights and womens rights, and generally are antagonistic to non muslims. Note that George Galloway, the founder of the party, is a corrupt (he was one of the worst offenders in the MP scandel) nostalgic communist guy who lost the Soviet Union, so made a unholy so to say alliance with far right wing muslims to keep his political career alive. He´ś also a notorious ******* and doesn´t take criticism well, maybe that´s why he sought such an alliance. The head of the party, Salma Yacoob, is a right wing muslim whos joked about an Islamic Republic of Britian being formed.

That´ś pretty much the reason the party does so lousy in elections and garners little support outside conservative muslims. The main point being of course, that RESPECT, easily the biggest far right wing gathering in the UK, doesn´t do a good job condemning terrorism, and as others have pointed out (in the very links I gave) even a lot of mainstream muslims don´t do the best job in condeming terrorism. So don´t get surprised when people label muslims as terrorist, when they are partially to blame for not countering this misconception in an effective manner.

secondly, its a logical fact, that oppresson and acts that were commited in abu gharib by your peace loving American army

Exactly what my links bring up, many muslims cannot take criticism and always try to find some counter to it to distract the topic. They hate open criticism of themselves, with the exception of liberal and secular muslims who basically are forced to go with ex-muslim groups because the majority of islamic organizations don´t like them and pretty much treat them as traitors. It´s as if you´ŕe reading from some islamic ticker tape, it´s ridiculous to be honest but highly predictable.

[ozymandias]

Where is Ozymandias?

I sleep occasionally. Usually not more than 2-3 hours ;-)

[ozymandias]

Ozymandias

The Majority of Muslims do not follow Terrorism, you should visit UK and see for yourself, Muslims are busy making money and running their businesses, you will only see them on a friday going for a community prayer.

Terrorism is a cause of powerful nations such as USA foreign policy. I agree Muslims do not protest enough or openly object terrorism but many have but have sadly been killed in the process.

Muslim world isnt so open as you have in the west. Muslim world is infested with foreign agencies, militants, interest gainers etc

I'm not just talking in the Middle East -- I am also talking about the rioters in Europe, or the terrorists in the 'west'.

[ozymandias]

I don't understand how ozyman assumes they must be muslim.

I don't understand why you think I am assuming they must be Muslim.

[ozymandias]

imb706, you have brought up a very interesting issue forward, dear. The Muslims who do condemn this sort of heinous acts of violence are a huge silent majority. This is heart wrenching.

Be silent no more! Go forth, and do good works!

[ozymandias]

Dear friend, I don't deny that he is a Muslim.

Sorry if I confused you with one of the many posters that are arguing just that. I am catching up on the thread, and many posters, in a short time made exactly that claim.

However, these sorts of approaches to conflict resolution is not Islamic.

He is not Islamic as *you* follow it. He likely makes the exact same argument that *YOU* are not Islamic, because he looks at the same writings and sees them teaching something quite different.

[MazloomyarMaseed]

Illustrates my point perfectly. The people who form RESPECT (despite the fact the name stands for left wing causes) are far right wing muslims who believe in jewish conspiracy theories, are against gay rights and womens rights, and generally are antagonistic to non muslims. Note that George Galloway, the founder of the party, is a corrupt (he was one of the worst offenders in the MP scandel) nostalgic communist guy who lost the Soviet Union, so made a unholy so to say alliance with far right wing muslims to keep his political career alive. He´ś also a notorious ******* and doesn´t take criticism well, maybe that´s why he sought such an alliance.

That´ś pretty much the reason the party does so lousy in elections and garners little support outside conservative muslims. The main point being of course, that RESPECT, easily the biggest far right wing gathering in the UK, doesn´t do a good job condemning terrorism, and as others have pointed out (in the very links I gave) even a lot of mainstream muslims don´t do the best job in condeming terrorism. So don´t get surprised when people label muslims as terrorist, when they are partially to blame for not countering this misconception in an effective manner.

Exactly what my links bring up, many muslims cannot take criticism and always try to find some counter to it to distract the topic. They hate open criticism of themselves, with the exception of liberal and secular muslims who basically are forced to go with ex-muslim groups because the majority of islamic organizations don´t like them and pretty much treat them as traitors. It´s as if you´ŕe reading from some islamic ticker tape, it´s ridiculous to be honest but highly predictable.

The one thing i hate about respect and especially george galloway is his clear stance on being very supportive of Gay rights, and regards to women rights, he has many female members who went for election who are also non muslim.

Also you insult him this clearly shows how truely you are a Khazar in the closet. Why dont you just admit to us the truth about your identity!

You complain about Muslims all day but never mention the illegal settlements that your jewish bros are doing in Palestine? is that not terrorism? throwing somebody off their land and building your house over it?

Just admit to us all your true identity mr IMB. Everywhere we go, we always find some jew has a hand in the trouble, i can post 1000's of links to prove this but i find it very amusing how Americans dictate to us how bad muslims are but never mention mossad and ther crimes and their abuse of forging peoples passports to do assination missions in other peoples countries.

If somebody criticising a little Khazar then the majority of Americans come to their support, but when a muslim is being murdered or totured and a fellow muslim comes to his/her support, the khazar bandwagon comes and says its islamist terrorism.

America is a joke, look at your problems, and you want to dictate to us all how bad we are.

[ozymandias]

what if a jew was a friend of a holocaust denier, would jews consider him as a real jew or even a fellow Jew?

First off, 'Jew' has two meanings -- and ethnicity that can never be lost due to political leanings.

Secondly, even if a Jew (religiously, not just ethnically) was a Holocaust denier themselves, they are still a Jew.

Lastly -- again with Holocaust denial? I have heard more references to Holocaust Deniers since I started on this forum than in the rest of my life -- and Deniers actually come stand outside my office once or twice a year.

[ozymandias]

The one thing i hate about respect and especially george galloway is his clear stance on being very supportive of Gay rights, and regards to women rights, he has many female members who went for election who are also non muslim.

Also you insult him this clearly shows how truely you are a Khazar in the closet. Why dont you just admit to us the truth about your identity!

You complain about Muslims all day but never mention the illegal settlements that your jewish bros are doing in Palestine? is that not terrorism? throwing somebody off their land and building your house over it?

Just admit to us all your true identity mr IMB. Everywhere we go, we always find some jew has a hand in the trouble, i can post 1000's of links to prove this but i find it very amusing how Americans dictate to us how bad muslims are but never mention mossad and ther crimes and their abuse of forging peoples passports to do assination missions in other peoples countries.

If somebody criticising a little Khazar then the majority of Americans come to their support, but when a muslim is being murdered or totured and a fellow muslim comes to his/her support, the khazar bandwagon comes and says its islamist terrorism.

America is a joke, look at your problems, and you want to dictate to us all how bad we are.

Wow. Just Wow.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Dear ozymandias, your approach to this whole issue is not honest. It seems to me that you want to label Islam as a violent religion because that is what the word on the street is.

You whole argument is based on the no true Scotsman fallacy. Further, you seem to be siding with those who label Islam as a violent religion. Are you trying to say that you have never ever met a peaceful Muslim? Moreover, are you saying that you have enough knowledge about Islam to conclude that Islam is a violent religion?

If your answer to the first question is yes, then I see your point. If your answer to the second question is yes, then I would like to see you proving it academically.

Don't just play the devil's advocate. Be honest.

In order for you to be fair you would have to back up your conclusion as to why Islam is a violent religion and not peaceful. The no true Scotsman fallacy is not always true.

[ozymandias]

Dear ozymandias, your approach to this whole issue is not honest. It seems to me that you want to label Islam as a violent religion because that is what the word on the street is.

Not at all. I simply refuse to let people weasel out of the issues by using logical fallacies.

You whole argument is based on the no true Scotsman fallacy.

Not my whole argument, but one of the more common points I seem to have to make lately.

Further, you seem to be siding with those who label Islam as a violent religion. Are you trying to say that you have never ever met a peaceful Muslim?

No sir. I forgive you because you appear to be new to the thread, but I have already stated that I am friends with a large number of peaceful Muslims, and regularly attend their events and protests in an effort to help them out, even though I disagree with them over religious issues. My support for their political and ethical causes is much greater than my disagreements with them religiously.

Moreover, are you saying that you have enough knowledge about Islam to conclude that Islam is a violent religion?

I would never make such a claim about the whole religion, however, I will point out that Islam, just like every other religion, has had members that have done horrible things in the name of their religion, or have used their religion to further their horrible causes.

If your answer to the first question is yes, then I see your point. If your answer to the second question is yes, then I would like to see you proving it academically.

Don't just play the devil's advocate. Be honest.

In order for you to be fair you would have to back up your conclusion as to why Islam is a violent religion and not peaceful.

I think you misunderstood my stance. Could I have some more options, please? :-D

The no true Scotsman fallacy is not always true.

Indeed. There are cases where there is a hard and fast definition that removes the No True Scotsman card from play.

I would say that no true moral man engages in terrorism. The simple act of terrorism makes you immoral -- or at best, (with a liberal definition of terrorism) amoral.

To use a genetics example, no true human female has a "Y" chromosome, genetically speaking. Those that do have a "Y" are either a transgender, or a genetic abnormality.

The problem is that the definition of Muslim is fairly loose. While many around here argue that if you do 'X' you are not Muslim, the truth is that even a bad Muslim is a Muslim -- you can make mistakes and still be a Muslim. Not only that, but Muslim is a faith, and faiths by their very nature, are a result of interpreting lessons and teachings, and gleaning knowledge from a limited set of 'constructs'. It is perfectly understandable that the same set of 'constructs' -- the Koran, the Hadiths, etc, can be used to justify more than one stance. Just because two stances are not identical does not mean that one of the stances does not meet the requirements.

Even if a sect of a religion is 'wrong' in the eyes of some god, here on earth, if they meet the definition, they get grouped that way.

[imb706]

The one thing i hate about respect and especially george galloway is his clear stance on being very supportive of Gay rights

Maybe you´re mistaking the RESPECT party for the Greens and Liberal Democrats, and George Galloway for Peter Tatchell or Nick Clegg.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respect_Party#Equality

he has many female members who went for election who are also non muslim.

He himself obviously is not anti gay or anti woman, duh, he´s a modern human being with basic modern sensibilities. However, he doesn´t stand up for them because that would hurt his voter base. Similar to how liberal republicans won´t stand up for health care and education to appease their far right voter base.

He´s also a notorious user of escort services, which is fine with me, but I wonder how that goes with his fundie muslim friends...

Also you insult him this clearly shows how truely you are a Khazar in the closet. Why dont you just admit to us the truth about your identity!

Just admit to us all your true identity mr IMB. Everywhere we go, we always find some jew has a hand in the trouble, i can post 1000's of links to prove this but i find it very amusing how Americans dictate to us how bad muslims are but never mention mossad and ther crimes and their abuse of forging peoples passports to do assination missions in other peoples countries.

If somebody criticising a little Khazar then the majority of Americans come to their support, but when a muslim is being murdered or totured and a fellow muslim comes to his/her support, the khazar bandwagon comes and says its islamist terrorism.

America is a joke, look at your problems, and you want to dictate to us all how bad we are.

As my previous links illustrated perfectly, the islamic response to criticism is to pull wild assertions and conspiracy theories, and lame insults in an attempt to divert the subject (Jews and the war in Iraq tend to be the biggest) away from criticism of Islam into some very weak mud slinging fight in which muslims try to criticism the criticizer. Conservative (representative of much of islam) Islam cannot stand criticism, so red herrings are a constant tactic of theres. It certainly shows with you, you really do operate on an Islamic ticker tape.

All in all, you´ve done a very good job in proving my point that muslims are not very good at condemning terrorist. At least the conservative and far right ones.

Lastly -- again with Holocaust denial? I have heard more references to Holocaust Deniers since I started on this forum than in the rest of my life -- and Deniers actually come stand outside my office once or twice a year.

Ozy, you have to remember that Islam is pretty much the last place where anti-semitism and conspiracy theories related to that are accepted. Not all muslims believe in that stuff, no doubt, but a lot of islamic pundits and groups expouse propaganda that mirrors the Nazis and Henry Ford.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Dear ozymandias,

Not at all. I simply refuse to let people weasel out of the issues by using logical fallacies.

Dear friend, your answer hints at the fact that you do believe Islam is a violent religion. Not everything is a logical fallacy. Just because someone cannot comprehend that 2+2=4, does not mean that 2+2 does not equal to 4.

Not my whole argument, but one of the more common points I seem to have to make lately.

Fair enough!

No sir. I forgive you because you appear to be new to the thread, but I have already stated that I am friends with a large number of peaceful Muslims, and regularly attend their events and protests in an effort to help them out, even though I disagree with them over religious issues. My support for their political and ethical causes is much greater than my disagreements with them religiously.

Thank you! It will take a while before I properly acquaint myself with the whole forum.

I find a lot of contradictions in the second part of your statement. How have you concluded that Islam condones violence when you have peaceful friends, and to top it out, you are fighting for our cause?

I think, based on this statement, that you have trouble with religion as a whole and not specifically Islam. If my assumption is true, then hopefully I will try my best to help you to reconcile this.

I would never make such a claim about the whole religion, however, I will point out that Islam, just like every other religion, has had members that have done horrible things in the name of their religion, or have used their religion to further their horrible causes.

Correct, but this does not make religion bad. Religion would not be needed if people did not have shortcomings by nature.

I think you misunderstood my stance. Could I have some more options, please? :-D

Perhaps I have, and this is only due to the fact that I am new here.

Indeed. There are cases where there is a hard and fast definition that removes the No True Scotsman card from play.

I would say that no true moral man engages in terrorism. The simple act of terrorism makes you immoral -- or at best, (with a liberal definition of terrorism) amoral.

To use a genetics example, no true human female has a "Y" chromosome, genetically speaking. Those that do have a "Y" are either a transgender, or a genetic abnormality.

The problem is that the definition of Muslim is fairly loose. While many around here argue that if you do 'X' you are not Muslim, the truth is that even a bad Muslim is a Muslim -- you can make mistakes and still be a Muslim. Not only that, but Muslim is a faith, and faiths by their very nature, are a result of interpreting lessons and teachings, and gleaning knowledge from a limited set of 'constructs'. It is perfectly understandable that the same set of 'constructs' -- the Koran, the Hadiths, etc, can be used to justify more than one stance. Just because two stances are not identical does not mean that one of the stances does not meet the requirements.

Even if a sect of a religion is 'wrong' in the eyes of some god, here on earth, if they meet the definition, they get grouped that way.

If someone claims to be Muslim and commits acts that are not widely accepted, Muslims, who disagree with his or her actions, cannot call him or her a non-Muslim. Muslims can say that his actions are not Islamic. And if this is not enough for those who insist that his actions are a reflection of Islam, then the onus lies on them to prove it. The reason being is that you have one Muslim who is peace loving, and you have another who is not. They both cannot be right. So, if you are going to conclude that the action of the non-peace-loving Muslim is a true reflection of Islam, then you would have to show why.