Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Had the guy been a Muslim, shooting several policemen dead, in possession of bomb making material at his house, he would certainly been called "terrorist" by both the politicians and the media (and you).
As Juju had mentioned if that guy is a Muslim but was shooting and killed a few policemen because he declared specifically and clearly he wanted revenge for his drug trafficker brother who was killed by the police or some other secular reasons then that Muslim is not a terrorist.
Naturally [based human instinct] in the present circumstances some people will straightaway assumed he is a terrorist. This is because Islamic-inspired terroristic attacks are so prevalent and common at present. But the fact will always prevail.
Quote:
That is just an assumed definition by some; not the exactly true definition. Terrorism by its true definition is an act of terrorizing people. The rest on top of that, such as "Islam" and "Muslim" ("Islamic terrorists" and "Muslim terrorists"), is based on individual view point.
It is not based on individuals' view point when attacks are linked to Islam because the Islamist terrorist declare very clearly s/he was doing it based on the doctrines of Islam.
The fact is Allah condone 'terror' in the Quran, here is one verse amongst the many others;
3:151. We [Allah] shall cast terror into the hearts of those [infidels] who disbelieve because they [infidels] ascribe unto Allah partners [idols and deities], for which no warrant hath been revealed. Their [infidels] habitation is the Fire, and hapless the abode of the wrong doers [infidels].
8:12. When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying) I [Allah] am with you. So make those who believe [Muslims] stand firm. I will throw fear [terror] into the hearts of those [infidels] who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger.
8:57. If thou comest on them [infidels] in the war, deal with them [infidels] so as to strike fear [terror] in those [infidels] who are behind them [infidels], that haply they [infidels] may remember.
If fact, the 'Reliance of the Traveler', a guide for the Sunni recommended Muslims should at least generate events of 'terror' at least twice a year to keep the infidels in check.
Quote:
By your definition, bomber Bush and bomber Blair attacking Iraq, to achieve their political goal, were "terrorists". They were American and British terrorists by your definition. After the Chilcot Report (on Iraq Inquiry), a parent of a dead British soldier did call Blair a "terrorist". She knew the exact definition of "terrorist".
There is no deliberate stipulation of casting of terror in the US and UK constitution.
I agree is general any one who generate terror is a terrorist. Note the neighborhood gangsters, mafia, drug cartels, etc. can be defined as 'terrorist' but this is not used in the CONVENTIONAL sense. Thus it would be very odd to call these gangs and the neighborhood bully to be called a terrorists.
In the conventional sense as understood by the majority, terrorist[s] are those who generate terrors for a political purpose and they are NOT from a recognized Nations by the UN or if a Nation, have been condemned by the UN as a rogue country [North Korea, for example].
Quote:
They are fighting against injustice and so are Palestinians. If fighting in cause of eliminating injustice is labeled "political goal" then so be it as long as injustice is eliminated. A lot of so-called Muslim terrorists cite Western attacks on their countries. They see the Western attacks on their countries as political terrorism. Political terrorism is the real matchstick.
If they [Islamist terrorists] claimed they are fighting for the Palestinians, that is merely a secondary purpose and an excuse.
The Islamic terrorists are fighting and casting terror to secure and expedite their own selfish salvation to Paradise to get their very sensual rewards as promised by Allah IF they defend Allah's Islam from the infidels [Kuffar].
Quote:
If fighting in cause of eliminating injustice is labeled "political goal" then so be it as long as injustice is eliminated.
Hogwash. If a person is already violent, he doesn't seek or need rationalization after the fact - he's already violent, by acknowledgement of the argument itself. Violent people are, by definition, violent.
When telling the truth results in religious terrorism, there's something seriously evil with that religion.
So what do you want? That no one should be able to speak the truth about your horrid ideology? Nice blackmail tactic....you tell the truth and you make more terrorists? Let's see....what would be the principle here?
Hogwash. If a person is already violent, he doesn't seek or need rationalization after the fact - he's already violent, by acknowledgement of the argument itself. Violent people are, by definition, violent.
Virtuallyeveryone will seek justification for their actions. Very many members of ISIS are new converts to Islam because they believe the nonsense spread by anti-Islamic sites and those who preach Islam requires violence.
When telling the truth results in religious terrorism, there's something seriously evil with that religion.
Possibly or it could be the method used to protest instills and encourages violence. Somtetimes the message can be one of peace, but the method can cause hatred and violence.
So what do you want? That no one should be able to speak the truth about your horrid ideology? Nice blackmail tactic....you tell the truth and you make more terrorists? Let's see....what would be the principle here?
It all comes down to intent and methods. A person can have the best of intentions and ruin them by the methods used. Some people use a sledgehammer when a gentle touch serves as a much better means of presenting a view.. while there are numerous barriers to communications, even among people that agree with each other, the most common ones and most difficult to overcome are anger and personal prejudices. when either or both raise their ugly heads, meaningful dialogue suffers or even ends.
[b]
Virtually everyone will seek justification for their actions. Very many members of ISIS are new converts to Islam because they believe the nonsense spread by anti-Islamic sites and those who preach Islam requires violence.
During genocides and terrible evils of Nazism, very many members of Hitler's Nazi Party were also very new converts to Nazism from other political parties.
The point is "new converts" are not the critical factor, what is critical is the evil laden elements in the ideology, i.e. within Nazism itself and in this case Islam.
The fact is there are malignant evil laden elements that influence and inspire a very significant SOME Muslims who are naturally born with active evil tendencies to commit terrible evils and violence.
Quote:
... because they [some Muslims] believe the nonsense spread by anti-Islamic sites ..
This is one of the WORST argument from you.
How in the world would Muslims [even the SOME evil prone ones] believe what the anti-Islamic sites are postings.
What the anti-Islamic sites [most] are doing is merely reflecting and pointing out the evil laden elements in the Quran, Ahadiths, Sira, etc. and the terrible evils and violence committed by SOME Muslims who are evil prone.
Quote:
Possibly or it could be the method used to protest instills and encourages violence. Sometimes the message can be one of peace, but the method can cause hatred and violence.
Nah!
Note the either DUCK or RABBIT perspective where both are true.
As with the above, many verses in the Quran can be perceived in the good or evil perspective and either way they are to be accepted by Allah as merits toward Paradise.
The fact is no humans in the World can judge whatever decisions made by those evil prone Muslims who are carrying out their duty as Muslims.
Another point is the evil prone Muslims are very sincere in their acts as they will not dare to go against Allah's words, else they will end up in terrible HELL.
Quote:
It all comes down to intent and methods. A person can have the best of intentions and ruin them by the methods used. Some people use a sledgehammer when a gentle touch serves as a much better means of presenting a view.. while there are numerous barriers to communications, even among people that agree with each other, the most common ones and most difficult to overcome are anger and personal prejudices. when either or both raise their ugly heads, meaningful dialogue suffers or even ends.
This terrible evils and violence in this case is too serious for humanity to be a question of [best] intent and [wrong] methods.
The fact is the inherent embedded evil laden elements in the Quran, Ahadith, Sira, Sunnah, etc. that influenced and inspire the vulnerable significant SOME [~20%] Muslims who are naturally born with active evil impulses and tendencies.
During genocides and terrible evils of Nazism, very many members of Hitler's Nazi Party were also very new converts to Nazism from other political parties.
The point is "new converts" are not the critical factor, what is critical is the evil laden elements in the ideology, i.e. within Nazism itself and in this case Islam.
The fact is there are malignant evil laden elements that influence and inspire a very significant SOME Muslims who are naturally born with active evil tendencies to commit terrible evils and violence.
This is one of the WORST argument from you.
How in the world would Muslims [even the SOME evil prone ones] believe what the anti-Islamic sites are postings.
What the anti-Islamic sites [most] are doing is merely reflecting and pointing out the evil laden elements in the Quran, Ahadiths, Sira, etc. and the terrible evils and violence committed by SOME Muslims who are evil prone.
Nah!
Note the either DUCK or RABBIT perspective where both are true.
As with the above, many verses in the Quran can be perceived in the good or evil perspective and either way they are to be accepted by Allah as merits toward Paradise.
The fact is no humans in the World can judge whatever decisions made by those evil prone Muslims who are carrying out their duty as Muslims.
Another point is the evil prone Muslims are very sincere in their acts as they will not dare to go against Allah's words, else they will end up in terrible HELL.
This terrible evils and violence in this case is too serious for humanity to be a question of [best] intent and [wrong] methods.
The fact is the inherent embedded evil laden elements in the Quran, Ahadith, Sira, Sunnah, etc. that influenced and inspire the vulnerable significant SOME [~20%] Muslims who are naturally born with active evil impulses and tendencies.
What I said was:
Very many members of ISIS are new converts to Islam because they believe the nonsense spread by anti-Islamic sites
I was not clear. I was referring to the Non-Muslims that converted to Islam in order to Join ISIS. They are the ones that believe the anti-Islamic sites about Islam and convert to the concept of Islam, the anti-Islamic sites present. Joining ISIS becomes their goal. Their purpose in converting to what they believe is Islam is for the purpose of joining ISIS not because they desire to worship Allaah(swt)
During genocides and terrible evils of Nazism, very many members of Hitler's Nazi Party were also very new converts to Nazism from other political parties.
The point is "new converts" are not the critical factor, what is critical is the evil laden elements in the ideology, i.e. within Nazism itself and in this case Islam.
Another pathetic analogy!
You are discarding here your own figures of 20% and 80%.
Were 80% of the Nazis peaceful people as are 80% of Muslims?
Nazi ideology national humanist
Man-made
It does not claim that its source book of God or inspired by God to Muhammad
While Islam is the religious thought of colonial
Adegue that God and the source of all his teachings are from God
This is the essential difference between the two
You are discarding here your own figures of 20% and 80%.
Were 80% of the Nazis peaceful people as are 80% of Muslims?
The principle is the same.
This is why only a small group of the top echelon of the Nazi Party were proven to be guilty and not all the Germans who were merely foot soldiers.
I am certain there were ~80% of Germans who do not have active evil tendencies but has no choice but to join the Nazi Party out of sheer peer and social pressure, else they will be regarded as enemies of the state and liable to be killed.
What is critical here is the main ideology, the Main Kempf that emanated from one very evil prone person who influenced and inspired a small group very prone persons plus many from the ~20% of evil prone Germans.
So that is a very appropriate and effective analogy.
The principle is the same.
This is why only a small group of the top echelon of the Nazi Party were proven to be guilty and not all the Germans who were merely foot soldiers.
80% (your figure) of Muslims are not the foot soldiers of the 20% (your figure).
Quote:
I am certain there were ~80% of Germans who do not have active evil tendencies but has no choice but to join the Nazi Party out of sheer peer and social pressure, else they will be regarded as enemies of the state and liable to be killed.
80% (your figure) of Muslims haven't joined the other 20% (your figure).
Quote:
What is critical here is the main ideology, the Main Kempf that emanated from one very evil prone person who influenced and inspired a small group very prone persons plus many from the ~20% of evil prone Germans.
There was only one mein kampf in Germans. In Muslims, there are two struggles; Major and minor. Major struggle is against SELF (within) rather than enemy outside.
Quote:
So that is a very appropriate and effective analogy.
Wrong analogy! Totally ineffective.
80% (your figure) haven't joined the 20% (your figure). Therefore, only 20% (your figure) promote violent jihad or the Mein Kampf whereas the other 80% (your figure) are fighting the Major Jihad only (fighting the enemy within). There is no comparison between the two struggles. Thus a pathetic analogy.
80% (your figure) of Muslims are not the foot soldiers of the 20% (your figure).
80% (your figure) of Muslims haven't joined the other 20% (your figure).
There was only one mein kampf in Germans. In Muslims, there are two struggles; Major and minor. Major struggle is against SELF (within) rather than enemy outside.
Wrong analogy! Totally ineffective.
80% (your figure) haven't joined the 20% (your figure). Therefore, only 20% (your figure) promote violent jihad or the Mein Kampf whereas the other 80% (your figure) are fighting the Major Jihad only (fighting the enemy within). There is no comparison between the two struggles. Thus a pathetic analogy.
Going back to the my original point;
Starting from Woodrow LI's reply, i.e.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI
[b]
Virtually everyone will seek justification for their actions. Very many members of ISIS are new converts to Islam because they believe the nonsense spread by anti-Islamic sites and those who preach Islam requires violence.
I responded that "new converts" are not the critical reasons for the evils of ISIS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum
During genocides and terrible evils of Nazism, very many members of Hitler's Nazi Party were also very new converts to Nazism from other political parties.
The point is "new converts" are not the critical factor, what is critical is the evil laden elements in the ideology, i.e. within Nazism itself and in this case Islam.
The fact is there are malignant evil laden elements that influence and inspire a very significant SOME Muslims who are naturally born with active evil tendencies to commit terrible evils and violence.
Woodrow LI is short-sighted on this issue and blame the 'new converts' as the main factors for the terrors of ISIS.
The Muslims of ISIS are not mainly new converts but rather most of them are the different factions of Sunnis from Iraq and Syria.
Do you agree with this? [1]
As for the root cause, I stated, it not the new converts but rather it is the malignant evil laden elements [anologically with those in the Main Kempf] that inspire the evil prone Muslims of ISIS to commit terrible evil and violence.
Do you agree with this [2].
So there are only two points [1] and [2] here that are subject to discussion.
The 'analogy' is with reference to the evil laden element in both the Quran and the Main Kempf, not the 80/20%.
Your 80% and 20% is off topic and mess up the whole issue.
If conversion to Islam means switching to terrorism
Is this the meaning of
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
