Posted on 07/22/2005 9:02:14 AM PDT by CHARLITE
Char
Zia's Legacy.
Book sounds it's worth reading.
At least members of the USG should.
This still does not address the catch 22 of Islam. Muhammad's prime directive was to wage war on infidels until they all surrender.
There is no Islam without Muhammad, so how can anyone say that jihad against infidels is not true Islam?
Good article.What's it going to take to get past the pc rhetoric?What happens if terrorists(in the US)start blowing up schools,packed stadiums,or malls on a busy weekend?While islamonuts are blowing themselves up(and MURDERING innocent civilians),the msm,academians,and polititians are still beating the appeasement drum.Sickening.
ping
Second, I really don't know where the whole suicide bombing thing began, maybe invented by some fanatical, egotistic mullah with a God (Allah?) complex and political power goals. Mohammad preferred all-out open war on the battlefield during his jihad. The ones who went to heaven, the "martyrs," were the ones who fought on the battlefield with honor against a like opponent. From my understanding of the Quran, these suicide bombers are going to Muslim hell for the murder of innocents.
One of the most important and clarifying works I've read. And from a mathematician, too. Imagine that...
You don't know what you're talking about.
BTTT
Really? Explain.
Subterfuge and dissembling are good in wartime. Only an inept commander wouldn't use both. If you look at the context, I was talking about how the concept of suicide bombers didn't exist. It is a recent fabrication.
Lastly, Islam is a highly decentralized cult, there is no clear authority or titular leader of any sort.
Not anymore. Decentralization does cause problems with religions. Christianity has the same problem, from churches that support homosexuals to "God Hates Fags," from peaceful groups to ones that advocate the murder of doctors, and long ago the same inter-sect warfare that you see in Islam today.
We have the basic problem that weak people will get drawn to the fanatical demagogues of any religion. There are a lot of weak people in the world, and they will do the leader's bidding.
The author fails to note that Jihad is one of the pillars of Islam and no Muslim can edit Jihad out of the religion unless he wants his head separated from his body.
You just said that Islam is decentralized. These are one of the decentralized factions. There are Muslims all over who want peace, but there are two problems with them. One problem is shown in this story, the other is that what they do never makes the news. Terrorists are news, people just living their lives are not. That is why so many people don't believe they exist.
There haven't been any meaningful religious wars in Christendom for centuries
And Islam is over 600 years younger than Christianity. In the middle ages, those of the then 1,500 year-old Buddhist religion were probably wondering why Christians were running around killing people so much.
Muslims have less of an excuse though. Today's technology should allow pretty much everyone to get the message that religious wars are not a good thing. Unfortunately, most of the terrorists get their news from only one source: their demagogue Mullahs.
Oops, in my post referred to an article about how moderate Muslims should speak up and turn in the terrorists.
BTW, you're harping on how the religion is now. This article is about the Quranic concepts behind terrorism. I merely pointed out that I found nothing in the Quran supporting suicide bombers, and those murderers going to heaven.
Again, you're going on contemporary Islam, not the Quran. As you said, what these people believe is what their governments and mullahs want them to believe. And that is usually not friendly to the West.
The religious leaders are powerful because the people make them so is more accurate than the idea that the people would be tolerant and secular if the religious leaders weren't stirring them up
Ah, the chicken and the egg. In Iraq, it's really about power. The minority Sunnis are used to running things, and don't want it to stop. The Shiites are actually showing great restraint, with their leaders pleading for the people not to retaliate for Sunni violence, thus continuing the cycle.
You know people don't want to admit that they are the source of their own problems. These religious leaders point to the West as the source and the people gather around them secure in the knowledge that their situation isn't their fault. Claiming an outside enemy is a great way to get people to rally around you, whether the enemy exists (as in the terrorists helping Bush win his second term), or doesn't (as in the mullahs telling their people that we are the reason for their desperate situation).
Frankly, it is my hope that the West begins the process of radically critiquing Islam and subjecting it's central texts to both scrutiny and open mockery
If you've read about any of the Bible inerrantists, you know that there will still be holdouts when all errors are laid open. But for the Quran that process already started years ago, and the authors are not yet dead. Of course, they don't dare study in any of the Muslim theocracies. They are not all as brave as Martin Luther, nor do they have the powerful protection of a Prince Frederick.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.